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 takes closer to 40 minutes according to the survey just completed M

The argument states that Waymarsh city must implement the policy of nearby Garville city in order to control the traffic. It is based on the premise that road-building as an alternative will disrupt residential neighborhoods. Because the policy was successful in Garville, it is expected to achieve the same level of success in Waymarsh. This argument seems plausible and seems appealing to the readers at the first glance. However on scrutiny, it is shocking to note that the argument is rife with holes and assumptions. Lots of evidence required to validate the argument are missing and this considerably weakens the argument as such.

First of all, the concept of traffic becoming a problem in Waymarsh is clearly not established. It is just mentioned that a survey was conducted three years ago. So, it is likely that it might not be relevant in the present scenario. Details like the number of people surveyed, the questions asked to them etc.. are not furnished. Moreover, the comparison as such suffers from data insufficiency. The survey is quite old and there might have been many developments taken place, in terms of establishment of new industries, factories, educational institutions, malls etc.. This would in-turn have increased the travel time as more people commute to work. Moreover, there may be a case that the people are not driving at the same speed as they were driving few years back, which might be a reason for traffic congestion. Another possibility is that all parts of the city was not given equal weightage during the survey and only the heavily traffic-affected areas were looked into. Hence, these details must be mentioned in order for the readers to believe the survey as a valid claim.

Secondly, the argument states that the new roads will surely disrupt the residential neighborhoods of Waymarsh. The period during which the Members of the town council made this suggestion is not specified. The case might be that, this suggestion would have been true few years back, but not at the present. Moreover, it is likely that the construction of roads will help many people by having access to the city. Hence, the case of how the road-construction will affect the residential neighborhoods is not clearly relevant at first sight. The costs of road-construction are said to be expensive. But it is not mentioned whether the Government is willing to come forward to bear such huge costs for the betterment of people. Other possibilities are not looked into. And the suggestion of road-building is clearly dismissed on the premise that it is 'expensive and will disturb the residential neighborhoods'. Therefore, a balanced suggestion must be made weighing the advantages against disadvantages. Only then, will the readers clearly get the point on why exactly was the suggestion of road-building not accepted as a solution to the problem.

Thirdly, the argument opines that following the policy of Garville is the 'only possible solution' of solving this issue. Other solutions are not discussed and compared with the finalized one. Moreover, the case of 'faulty analogy' is also blatantly relevant. Cities of Waymarsh and Garville are compared for the implementation of the policy. But, there might be a case that what works out in Garville, might not augur well in Waymarsh. May be the size, demographics, concerns of the population etc... are different in both the cities. It would have been more convincing, if the author has proven that both cities are suitable for this policy. The preferences of the population can also be variable. For instance, the people in Waymarsh may not fall for rewards for shared-rides or free gas coupons. They may already be well-off with their wealth. Hence these economic and geographical features of these two cities must be matched with each other, even before making a comparison and the author has committed a serious flaw in this regard.

On careful analysis, it is clearly shown that this argument has a number of fallacies. The surveys are not being elaborately described and the time period is not mentioned. The suggestion of road-construction method must still be thoroughly analysed before disposing it. The implementation of the policy followed at Garville must be considered with caution, taking into account, the similarities and differences between the two cities. The author can strengthen his argument by elaborating upon the details of the survey. Moreover, he must produce proper evidence, as to how the construction of roads can lead to the disruption of neighborhoods. Last but not the least, the author must also furnish the applicability of the policy followed at Garville by means of listing out the similarities and feasibility of the policy in the city of Waymarsh.