As public concern over drug abuse has increased, authorities have been

Question

The question:

The following appeared in the editorial section of a newspaper:
"As public concern over drug abuse has increased, authorities have been more vigilant in their efforts to prevent illegal drugs from entering the country. Many drug traffickers have consequently switched from marijuana which is bulky, or heroin, which has a market too small to justify the risk of severe punishment, to cocaine. Thus enforcement efforts ave ironically resulted in an observed increase in the illegal use of cocaine"

My response:

The argument made in the editorial section of a newspaper about drug abuse is flawed. The writer claims that authorities have “increased” vigilance when it comes to illegal drugs entering the country, there is no statistical information to back up the claim of drug traffickers switching from a drug like marijuana to cocaine, and as a result the conclusion is nothing more than a vague assumption.

For example, there is no actual number value placed on the claim that authorities have spent more time observing the illegal drugs trying to enter the country. If authorities caught two traffickers on during their attempt this time and four traffickers during another attempt it is surely an increase, but not one that holds much significance. Furthermore, a percent amount should be placed on the claim. Statistics proving that drug traffickers switched from marijuana to cocaine has also been omitted.

Lastly, there is no sound data supporting the claim that law enforcement efforts have resulted in the increase of cocaine. Since it first appeared in the country in the 70s cocaine usage has grown among its users as a “party drug.” Also, because other drugs like heroin are more expensive to get from dealers cocaine could be seeing an increase in the usage of cocaine

Given that these points are lacking such detail, it is not safe to assume enforcement efforts have caused cocaine to increase. There is a vague value placed on the monitoring of drugs entering the country, there is also no sound data supporting why drug users switched from marijuana to cocaine, and the conclusion itself is vague.

MahmoudFawzy · Answer

Hi  eiancel

Your approach of criticizing the author's claim is incorrect.
 First, you have to divide the passage into two main parts: premise and conclusion: 
in our case:
 the premise: 
(1) increased drug abuse ---> authorities exert more effort.
(2) bulky marijuana --> dealers switch from marijuana to cocaine
(3) sever punishment ---> dealers switch from heroin to cocaine
 the conclusion: 
authorities efforts ---> increase cocaine use

Second, you must deal with the premise as true 100%: 
you can't attack the premise and claim that it is false because the author didn't mention data.
Because your argument only relied on the assumption that lack of data means false premise, your argument is so weak.
 
Third, you have to elaborate the gaps between the premise and the conclusion and attack these gaps. 
To do so, you have to define the type of the argument you are dealing with. In our case, it is a cause-effect  (X cause Y)  argument. To attack this type, there are three approaches:
1- mentioning that other causes may be the result of the effect  ( Y is caused by other things rather than X) 
examples: increased cocaine use may be due to consumer's demand/ high profit for the dealers/ price suitability for the users/ cocaine is not imported but made domestically/ cocaine has higher price to justify the risk
2- mentioning that the causality relationship may be reversed  (Y is the cause of X) 
example: the increase of cocaine use has triggered the authorities to exert extra effort to control the situation
3- mentioning that the cause and effect happened coincidentally at the same time but no real relationship between them  (X and Y are co-incidental) 
example: switching of dealers to cocaine is not related to authorities efforts, maybe duet to market trends or fashion among users or even coincidental shortage of other drugs that made the dealers switch to cocaine (marijuana, heroin and cocaine are not all the drugs in the market)

Fourth, state what more investigations to be done by the author to ensure that his claim is correct. 
example: information about the source of cocaine, prices of drugs, demand, availability of drugs in the market, ...

last, the word count is a little bit small. it should be a least more than 300. 
Anyway, if you followed the previous steps, you will find a lot of ideas to mention and word-count will not be an issue.

I hope you accept my criticism in a constructive way.
View this link for more tips:  https://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-get-6-0-awa-my-guide-64327.html#p470475

eiancel · Answer

Hey Mahmoudfawzy83

Thank you for the elaborate breakdown. Tonight, I’m going to try to rewrite this essay or a whole new one without time constraints.

Would you be willing to review that one for me as well?

MahmoudFawzy · Answer

Sure eiancel , waiting for you. Also have a look at my latest contributions in my signature, I wish they help you in your study

eiancel · Answer

Mahmoudfawzy83

This time I used a reference template you provided without time constraints to help me get a better idea of the points I should hit in my essay and the types of words that my writing should include. As time goes on and I get more comfortable writing, I'll start using time constraints and referencing the template less.
Let me know how good it is

Statement

The following appeared as park 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."

My Response:

The argument claims that corporations should look consider the city of Helios when seeking a new location and career opportunities because Helios has been able to sustain their economy during the recession period. Stated in that way the argument the argument reveals examples of leap of faith, poor reasoning, and ill-defined terminology. The conclusion of the argument also relies on assumptions for which there is no evidence. Hence the argument is unconvincing and flawed.

First, the argument readily assumes that just because Helios’s unemployment rate was lower than the national average,(1) Helios has an economy that maintains its stability. Yes, this is a commendable achievement, but this statement is still a stretch and not easy to support. (2) For example the employment rate for the city could have fallen because corporations could have closed down less productive businesses in times of the recession. Local business-owners also could have went out of business as well.(4) The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated how Helios was able to have an unemployment rate lower than the regional average by providing examples.

Second, the argument claims that Helios has been historically known to provide “its share” of manufacturing jobs. This again is a very weak claim as the argument uses vague and basic language with no real evidence supporting just how much manufacturing jobs Helios has provided. For instance, let’s say there the amount of manufacturing jobs in Helios’s region is at 15%. Helios provides 7% and another town or city provided the other 7% percent. Surely, it as provided a share, but not by a substantial amount, as both areas provide the same amount of manufacturing jobs. If the argument would have provided evidence that Helios employs many Warehouse Associates then the argument would be much more convincing.

Finally, the argument concludes with how Helios is expanding by attracting companies that focus on research and development of innovative technology. And yet again, there is no sound evidence showing why companies that focus on innovation should set up shop in Helios. There are countless other more successful cities that these companies can call their home. (1)Like, Sillicon Valley and San Fransisco. Without the support of strong evidence, one is left with the impression that this claim is farfetched wishful thinking.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the reasons mentioned above and is unconvincing. It could be stronger if the author mentioned all of the relevant facts. Without this information, the argument remains open for debate.

MahmoudFawzy · Answer

(1) the author didn't say that Helio maintained its stability. In fact, that author only mentioned the fact that the unemployment was low during recession and didn't clarify the reason. Maybe, workforce migrated Helio because of its poor situation, making the unemployment apparently low.
(2) you assumption contradicts the premise. the premise said that the unemployment lowered, while you assume that businesses are closed without resolving the dilemma of what the employees will do after they lose their jobs. (a logic explanation could be that when the big businesses shrank, the employees made their own small business so unemployment stayed low)
(3) another possible attack is to propose another scenario. For example: low unemployment may be bad for incoming businesses because if the unemployment is already too low, these businesses will suffer to find skilled employees to run the businesses.
(4) this part was good

This part is great.
another idea to attach here is to say that Helio was great "historically", but what about now????. Maybe the situation changed. so you can attack the author because he used outdated information.

This part is also very good.
(1) you can't use information that is too detailed. you can say that, in general, there are many other cities attracting innovation, and that the author failed to mention why Helio is special.
(2) another idea is that the author, at the beginning of the passage, was inviting all corporations, indefinitely, but at the end he mentioned R&D that is an interest for special type of corporations. The author's flaw is that not all companies would benefit from R&D incentives.

Much Better work this time  eiancel . I think you are on the right track.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

As public concern over drug abuse has increased, authorities have been

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards