"Studies suggest that an average coffee drinker's consumption of coffee increases with age, from age 10 through age 60. Even after age 60, coffee consumption remains high. The average cola drinker's consumption of cola, however, declines with increasing age. Both of these trends have remained stable for the past 40 years. Given that the number of older adults will significantly increase as the population ages over the next 20 years, it follows that the demand for coffee will increase and the demand for cola will decrease during this period. We should, therefore, consider, transferring our investments from Cola Loca to Early Bird Coffee."
The argument states that as the population ages, we should consider transferring our investments from Cola Loca to Early Bird Coffee. The reason for this conclusion is that as the population ages, people who drink coffee increase their consumption of coffee and those who drink cola decrease their consumption of cola. The argument in its current form is not convincing - the support for the conclusion is not strong - and the argument makes too many unwarranted assumptions.
To begin with, the argument assumes that a good number of people now prefer drinking coffee and as a result coffee consumption will increase over time. But the author is wrong in assuming this. If the number of people who prefer drinking coffee is significantly lower than the number of people who drink cola, then even if the population increases there will be a greater demand for cola. For example, in a population of 100 people if 75 drink cola and only 25 drink coffee, then even if the population ages there will be a greater number of people who drink cola. Hence cola consumption will still be greater. The author should clearly mention in his argument about the number of people who prefer cola or coffee.
In addition, the author nowhere mentions what is the average number of coffee drunk by the people in older ages. If average coffee consumption per person(in older ages) is less compared to average cola consumption per person(in older ages), then the argument cannot state with confidence that the coffee consumption will increase. For example if the average consumption of coffee is 2 cups a days ( by older age people) but average consumption of cola is 4 glasses a day( by older age people), then still the cola consumption is higher than coffee consumption. Thus the author should clearly mention these facts in his argument.
Additionally, the author assumes that older adults will significantly increase as the population ages. But this does not show that younger population will be lower. It is possible that the there are still a greater number of younger people and these people prefer drinking coffee. Thus the author does not give a strong reason in his argument
Finally, the author in his conclusion says we should consider shifting our investments from Cola Loca to Early bird coffee. These are two particular brands. It is possible that the Early Bird Coffee, which has a bad taste, is not preferred by the people. In such a case, the author would be wrong in suggesting this shift.
In sum, the argument is not strong enough. It lack proper reasoning and makes too many assumptions. If it included the above points, then the argument would have been more substantial.
The argument states that as the population ages, we should consider transferring our investments from Cola Loca to Early Bird Coffee. The reason for this conclusion is that as the population ages, people who drink coffee increase their consumption of coffee and those who drink cola decrease their consumption of cola. The argument in its current form is not convincing - the support for the conclusion is not strong - and the argument makes too many unwarranted assumptions.
To begin with, the argument assumes that a good number of people now prefer drinking coffee and as a result coffee consumption will increase over time. But the author is wrong in assuming this. If the number of people who prefer drinking coffee is significantly lower than the number of people who drink cola, then even if the population increases there will be a greater demand for cola. For example, in a population of 100 people if 75 drink cola and only 25 drink coffee, then even if the population ages there will be a greater number of people who drink cola. Hence cola consumption will still be greater. The author should clearly mention in his argument about the number of people who prefer cola or coffee.
In addition, the author nowhere mentions what is the average number of coffee drunk by the people in older ages. If average coffee consumption per person(in older ages) is less compared to average cola consumption per person(in older ages), then the argument cannot state with confidence that the coffee consumption will increase. For example if the average consumption of coffee is 2 cups a days ( by older age people) but average consumption of cola is 4 glasses a day( by older age people), then still the cola consumption is higher than coffee consumption. Thus the author should clearly mention these facts in his argument.
Additionally, the author assumes that older adults will significantly increase as the population ages. But this does not show that younger population will be lower. It is possible that the there are still a greater number of younger people and these people prefer drinking coffee. Thus the author does not give a strong reason in his argument
Finally, the author in his conclusion says we should consider shifting our investments from Cola Loca to Early bird coffee. These are two particular brands. It is possible that the Early Bird Coffee, which has a bad taste, is not preferred by the people. In such a case, the author would be wrong in suggesting this shift.
In sum, the argument is not strong enough. It lack proper reasoning and makes too many assumptions. If it included the above points, then the argument would have been more substantial.
