“The average price of an acre of land in the United States is now 50 times what it was in 1970, and nearly 200 times what it was in 1920. The nation’s population is projected to keep increasing, even as the amount of land remains constant. Therefore, people who are approaching retirement should invest heavily in real estate in order to ensure their financial security.”The author asserts that people who are close to retirement should invest in real restate because it can offer financial security. The argument not only doesn't address what define financial security, but also omits sufficient evidences and supports to validate his claim.
First, author mentions that that real estate offers financial security. The word "financial security" is relatively vague and doesn't tell readers precisely what it means to be financial secured. Perhaps it can mean stable return or no losing money. The author simply doesn't provide a clear definition. Assuming that author interrupts financial security as investment with stable return, the claim is still not very solid as while the housing price tends to go up according to historical pattern, there are some times in history that there was not the cause. For instance, in 2007, the United States encountered the financial crisis, which housing price dropped significantly as people couldn't afford their mortgages and returned their house back to the bank. This can be an evidence that housing price doesn't always go up; hence, investing in real estate has a possibility to lose money as well.
Second, the author neglects to consider other investments in the market that can offer financial security. For people that are close to retirement, it is very likely that they tend to look for investment that is less volatile and less risky. Investments such as government and corporate bonds could be a good fit for them. While author talks about real estates, it doesn't explain why it is good for financial security and how it compared to other investments in the market.
Third, investing heavily in one specific product is risky. In general, it is better to buy different asset classes and diversify the portfolio. The author simply doesn't address this point.
In summary, given the issues mentioned above, the author's argument is not sound and convincing. If he can address the mentioned flaws and provide more proofs to back up his point, the claim will be a much stronger one.