Arg. Essay Response for Gre - could someone please evaluate
[#permalink]
14 Jul 2014, 11:01
The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner.
"Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
From my perspective it is apparent that the letter writer is making an assumption in regards to the skateboarders causing a decrease in business for the store owners who have locations in Central Plaza in addition to linking the skateboarders to the increase in litter and vandalism. As a result, there are a multitude of factors that could not only negatively impact the businesses but also cause the litter and vandalism to increase.
In terms of the decrease in business, there are several factors that need to be studied before placing the sole blame on the skateboards. For instance, another mall might have opened up within a few miles of Central Plaza and customers are flocking to this new location simply because of its novelty, but it also could be something more troublesome such as the stores within the new location are better addressing the needs of the consumers in this locale. In addition, the city or county might have increased their sales tax and this has caused consumers to decrease their level of spending on nonessential items that are in large part sold by the businesses in Central Plaza. To ascertain if this is true, other businesses in the area who also sell these types of items will also be noticeably suffering from the increase in sales tax. Furthermore, there actually might be a change in the demographics of the consumers who patronize the businesses in this mall. For example, if the consumers are now younger at the college age, they will not want to buy clothes from older, established businesses that serve an older clientele. Instead, they will want to buy clothing from stores that sell items that are popular for their age group. Thus, it is clear that the loss of business cannot be placed solely at the feet of skateboarders without ruling out other possible factors.
Similarly, the fact that there is an increase in litter and vandalism does not mean that the skateboards are at the root cause. One factor could be that the city is not trying to pinch its pennies and has laid-off sanitation workers who routinely clean the mall area in the early morning hours picking up the litter from the previous day’s customers. Thus, the area seems more littered since no one is picking up the trash. Moreover, the city in which Central Plaza is located might have become in general a place that is not as safe with teenagers joining gangs and in general being a hazard to the law abiding population. Indeed, this could be indicative as to why vandalism has increased due to competition between gangs for territory. A final factor might be that there are less police officers on patrol at night due to cut backs on the city’s force. Without law enforcement, juvenile delinquents are taking advantage and vandalizing easy targets such as businesses at the mall. Once again, all these factors could play a role in the increase of vandalism and litter, not solely the skateboarders.
Consequently, the city government should not ban skateboarding until they rule out other factors that might cause the situation to occur, unlike the store owner who wrote the editorial.