AWA Prompt: poor writer, need some tips!

"The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a local newspaper:

'Our city council’s neglect of the impoverished Railroad Flats neighborhood has left businesses with little incentive to locate there. Building a new professional football stadium in the neighborhood would solve this problem. Thousands of football fans would travel to the area to see games, and they would buy from local merchants, encouraging new businesses to open. So our city council should move quickly to fund the construction of a professional football stadium in Railroad Flats in order to help the neighborhood develop a thriving economy.'

Discuss how well reasoned . . .etc."
- GMAC

Response:
The argument that Railroad Flat's city council needs to move to build a professional football stadium in order to stimulate the local economy omits multiple necessary considerations in order to make this a compelling argument. By assuming town conditions and being unclear as to what businesses will populate the town, this argument has failed to be persuasive.

This argument needs to provide more detail regarding the current state of Railroad Flats. For instance, the argument provided no information to support the city's ability to accomodate for such a stadium. The acquisition of a football stadium will likely result in the need for parking garages and hotels. Such new businesses will have to employee locals to have the best chance of stimulating the city's economy. Therefor, it would also be wise to consider the unemployment rate of the city. If these new jobs are going to employee far more people in Railroad Flats, then the plan could work. If most of them are already employed somewhere, then these companies are going to be bringing in money and paying off people located out of town. Thus, local economy will be riding solely on the taxes accrued through the football facility alone.

In the letter, it was stated that existing businesses currently have no incentive to locate in Railroad Flats. Later on in the article, it was stated that the action would influence new businesses to open. The argument really needs to consider one significant business and how it will explictly improve the city's economy. Let us consider the stadium being built, and people are drawn to the area. Existing businesses could evaluate where most traffic is coming from, and build new locations just outside of town in a more reliable economy. New businesses might benefit from the likely cheaper costs of opening up shop in the city. It could be unlikely that such startups will be sufficiently able to accomodate for a massive influx of visitors, creating a bad image for people newly exposed to the town, and hurting the local economy in the long term.

By not providing any detail about Railroad Flats beyond its economic state, and not providing further insight on what businesses will follow the stadium, and their likelyhood of stimulating the economy, the argument has failed to be cogent and persuasive.