Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Could somebody rate my no 1 AWA, please? [#permalink]
06 Nov 2013, 03:08
Thank you in advance!
The following appeared as part of an article in a magazine devoted to regional life:
"Corporations should look to the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location. Even in the recent recession, Helios's unemployment rate was lower than the regional average. It is the industrial center of the region, and historically it has provided more than its share of the region's manufacturing jobs. In addition, Helios is attempting to expand its economic base by attracting companies that focus on research and development of innovative technologies."
Discuss how well ...
The argument claims that corporations should look to the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new loaction. During the recent recession the unemployment rate was lower than the regional average. It has provided more than its share of the region’s manufacturing jobs and it attempts to attract companies that focus on research and development of innovative technologies. Stated in this way the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is weak/unconvincing and has several flaws.
Firstly, the argument readily assumes that lower than average unemployment rate in the region has a positive impression to the new companies. On the contrary, it could alert the companies because low unemployment rate means a small selection of available workers in the region. Additionally, the companies may have to compete over the work force with the already existing companies. Clearly, it will increase the labor costs and in case of many new working possibilities employers could change their jobs more easily. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly described the the available work force.
Secondly, the argument claims that that the city attempts to attract companies that focus on research and development of innovative technologies. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrante any methods how the city will attract the corporations. In fact, the city should think through and present how it will try to attract the corporations. To illustrate, there are many cities in the world that are trying to attract new companies and if you are not interesting or beneficial enough to the companies then nobody would move their company there. If the argument had provided evidence how it will plan to attract the companies (e.g. provide some support schemes or lower taxes to the companies that focus on research and development of innovative technologies etc.) the the argument would have been a lot more convincing.
Finally, it is stated that the city attempts to attract companies that focus on research and development of innovative technologies. As Helios has provided more than its share of the region’s manufacturing jobs it is unclear how it could provide the skilled work force to the companies that are focused on research and development. Will it help to retrain the employers? Are there any technology univirsities that could cooperate with the new companies? Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could be considerably strenghtened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess the merits of Helios, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors.
Could somebody rate my no 1 AWA, please?
06 Nov 2013, 03:08