The council of Maple County, concerned about the county's becoming overdeveloped, is debating a proposed measure that would prevent the development of existing farmland in the county. But the council is also concerned that such a restriction, by limiting the supply of new housing, could lead to significant increases in the price of housing in the county. Proponents of the measure note that Chestnut County established a similar measure ten years ago, and its housing prices have increased only modestly since. However, opponents of the measure note that Pine County adopted restrictions on the development of new residential housing fifteen years ago, and its housing prices have since more than doubled. The council currently predicts that the proposed measure, if passed, will result in a significant increase in housing prices in Maple County.
In the above argument the concern of the council of Maple County is described and in relation to that two examples of different county’s are given; which according to me can be irrelevant as it is not specified that they were facing the same problem as Maple County is facing, therefore argument stated above isn’t completely correct.
Firstly, it is stated in first sentence that the county is concerned of becoming overdeveloped there is no statement supporting this allegation so on what basis do they think that there will be overdevelopment in their county. So the council should keep in mind that the projections they are making that county will be overdeveloped is going to happen or not! And further investigation should be done and according to that policy should be passed.
Secondly, example of Chestnut County is given where same policy was applied ten years ago which is not a recent event so taking that county’s result under consideration would not give perfect solution as in ten years many things changes and it is possible that the population of that county hasn’t increased much which won’t bring increase in housing demands due to which price have increased modestly. Therefore, as there is no description given in the argument no result can be taken into consideration.
Thirdly, Pine County’s example is given and that to policy that they adapted 15 years ago which is also very long period in this 15 years there can be many changes or events possible which would result in significant increase in housing prices. There is possibility that some natural disaster took place due to which all houses got destroyed therefore due to sudden increase in demand of houses there is significant hike in the prices of houses.
From all the above flaws we can conclude that no proper incidents are taken into consideration, past events doesn’t give accurate explanation for anything that is going to take place in recent times. Therefore, council of Maple County should consider this and should think on the above arguments before making policy for the future event whose surety of occurring isn’t fully confirmed.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-29 | jenniferjack07 | 82 | view |
| 2020-01-23 | jason123 | 16 | view |
| 2019-12-19 | samramjam12345 | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-12 | nimesh94 | 55 | view |
| 2019-11-25 | cnegus | 63 | view |
- Issue: - In most professions and academic fields, imagination is more important than knowledge. 50
- The council of Maple County, concerned about the county's becoming overdeveloped, is debating a proposed measure that would prevent the development of existing farmland in the county. But the council is also concerned that such a restriction, by limiting 62
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'first', 'firstly', 'if', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'therefore', 'third', 'thirdly']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.234567901235 0.25644967241 91% => OK
Verbs: 0.195061728395 0.15541462614 126% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0740740740741 0.0836205057962 89% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0543209876543 0.0520304965353 104% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0246913580247 0.0272364105082 91% => OK
Prepositions: 0.123456790123 0.125424944231 98% => OK
Participles: 0.079012345679 0.0416121511921 190% => Less participles wanted.
Conjunctions: 2.82499681812 2.79052419416 101% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0222222222222 0.026700313972 83% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0641975308642 0.113004496875 57% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0320987654321 0.0255425247493 126% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0271604938272 0.0127820249294 212% => Maybe 'Which' is overused. If other WH_determiners like 'Who, What, Whom, Whose...' are used too in sentences, then there are no issues.
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2176.0 2731.13054187 80% => OK
No of words: 355.0 446.07635468 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.12957746479 6.12365571057 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34067318298 4.57801047555 95% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.374647887324 0.378187486979 99% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.253521126761 0.287650121315 88% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.191549295775 0.208842608468 92% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.129577464789 0.135150697306 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82499681812 2.79052419416 101% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 207.018472906 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.481690140845 0.469332199767 103% => OK
Word variations: 50.0846239709 52.1807786196 96% => OK
How many sentences: 10.0 20.039408867 50% => More sentences wanted.
Sentence length: 35.5 23.2022227129 153% => OK
Sentence length SD: 97.7489130374 57.7814097925 169% => OK
Chars per sentence: 217.6 141.986410481 153% => OK
Words per sentence: 35.5 23.2022227129 153% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.0 0.724660767414 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 3.58251231527 0% => OK
Readability: 60.8521126761 51.9672348444 117% => OK
Elegance: 1.59459459459 1.8405768891 87% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.459400094879 0.441005458295 104% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.170089200706 0.135418324435 126% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0674057968343 0.0829849096947 81% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.704522320783 0.58762219726 120% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.169370426085 0.147661913831 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.231376254544 0.193483328276 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.119637336947 0.0970749176394 123% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.350473679547 0.42659136922 82% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0920384285388 0.0774707102158 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.323450998963 0.312017818177 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.07562216961 0.0698173142475 108% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.33743842365 36% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.87684729064 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.82512315271 41% => OK
Positive topic words: 3.0 6.46551724138 46% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 5.36822660099 75% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 8.0 14.657635468 55% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.