The following appeared as a recommendation by a committee planning a ten-year budget for the city of Calatrava."The birthrate in our city is declining: in fact, last year's birthrate was only one-half that of five years ago. Thus the number of students en

The argument claims that due to the decrease in birthrate, Calatrava would not need to spend money on the activities related with children and teenagers. Hence, the funds allocated to programs used by adults would be supported sufficiently. Stated in this way, the argument manipulates the facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is weak and has several flaws.

First, the argument averts that the birthrate of the city is declining and provided the comparision of this year birthrates with the one that is five years before. The argument is stretched and undeveloped. The decline in birthrates is not explained convincing enough because there are no specific statistics that indicate the constant change in five or ten year period is provided. For instance, it is a possibility that there was a baby boom five years ago because of the economic condition of the city. Moreover, the decrease in birthrates in this year might be brought about by some illness that affects the pregnant women and caused them suffer from miscarriage. Hence, comparing birthrates of this year and five years ago would not provide an insightful view of the situation. The argument would be substantially stronger if the argument provided evidence that present the birthrate trend in a longer period. Unless these statitistic do not indicate the decline in birthrates, decreasing the funds for education would be a wrong attempt.

Second, even if the birthrates of the city is decreasing, it does not necessarily mean that the number of children who enrolled in the public schools would decline. There might be other factors that influence the number of students. To illustrate, people might move to Calatrava due to the economic welfare of the area. Hence, the number of children might increase due to this influx. In addition, the educational opportunities of the city might be better that the neighborhood cities, hence families might want to enroll their children to the public schools in Calatrava. Hence, the argument should present the expectations about the number of children who would dwell in the city. If no decline in number of school children was expected, then the argument would remain unsubstantiated.

Finally, the argument claims that the city council could reduce fundings for athletic playing fields and other recreational facilities to increase the money allocated on activities for adults. The argument misses that athletic playing fields and other recreational facilities might be used by adults as well as teenagers. Hence, decreasing funding for them is not the best decision. Moreover, the argument readily assumes that programs for adults would have sufficient funds. However, it is possible that the money saved from education and other activities that are primarily targeted young people might not be sufficient for programs used by adults. Hence, additional savings should be made for investing adult programs. Consequently, the city council would not be able to construct facilities of adults if the saving was insufficient.

In conclusion, the argument fails to provide a convincing case since it is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons.Therefore, it is unconvincing. The argument would be substantially stronger if it provided exact information that indicates the decline in birthrates. It is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors to evaluate the merit of a situation. Without this information, the argument would remain open to debate.