The following is a letter to the editor of the Waymarsh Times."Traffic here in Waymarsh is becoming a problem. Although just three years ago a state traffic survey showed that the typical driving commuter took 20 minutes to get to work, the commute now ta

In this argument, the author suggests that the policy of rewarding people who share rides to work in Waymarsh will achieve the same ideal consequence as in Garville. He bases his assertion on the sequences after implementing the policy, namely a distinct decrease in pollution levels in Garville and a falling of commuting times of people there. Whereas, lacking in convincing evidence, his conclusion is seriously impaired for its authenticity.

As is mentioned by the author, since a policy of rewarding people who share rides to work by giving them free gas was implemented in Garville, pollution levels there have dropped. Accordingly, he attributes the lower pollution levels to the effect of the policy. There might be, however, many possible cause of the improvement in environment, such as the execution of a new project on protecting the environment by limiting the effluent discharge of industries or the application of a cleaner energy resource. Therefore, other possibilities should be excluded to ensure the causality between the policy and the amelioration of environment.

Even though the pollution levels in Garville dropped because of the policy was carried out, the author should not claim that commuting times have fallen considerably for the practice of the new policy according to people from Garville. He apparently precludes any other probable cause, which in fact appears to be irrational. After the policy, there might happen to be a project on broadening the road in consideration of loosing the traffic pressure. In this case, the commuting times of people there will drop anyway. Thus, more details are required to confirm that policy of rewarding people who share rides to work definitely results in the reduction of commuting time.

Even if the improvement of environment and transportation in Garville was caused by the new policy, the author should not rush to the assertion that this policy will achieve the same effect in Waymarsh. He obviously premises that the two cities share the same crucial characteristics. Nonetheless, the city planning in Waymarsh could be totally different from it in Garville. For instance, the width of roads in Waymarsh is so insufficient for the growing population that rewarding people who share rides to work could hardly contribute to the traffic problem. Thereby, the author should provide more statistics to illustrate the liability of impementing the new policy.

Conclusively, the author attempts to claim that a policy of rewarding people who share rides to work in Garville should work equally well in Waymarsh. Yet in lack of cogent evidence, his argument is severely undermined.