" Corporations should look to the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location. Even in the recent recession, Helio'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 additions, Helios is attempting to expand its economic base by attracting companies that focus on research and development of innovative technologies"
My argument is as under:
The author comes to a conclusion that corporations should look to Helios while they are expanding their business or seeking new business opportunities. One of the reasons given for this conclusion is the low unemployment rate in Helios. One evidence that is given is Helios inclination to expand its economic base by attracting R&D focused companies.
One logical flaw in the reasoning is that the author has assumed a correlation between low rate of unemployment in a place and growth of industries in the region. The author has assumed that if a place is having low rate of unemployment, it means that a new industry will also thrive. The author fails to look at the point that low unemployment rate may be due to the fact that people in Helios are ready to accept unskilled jobs like factory workers, storekeepers in godowns etc because of the low levels of literacy.
Another flaw is that the author has assumed that all industries are of same nature. For example, a software development company that requires high quality of technical engineers cannot get good software developers even though the place can be very well suited for manufacturing or labour intensive industries.
However, the author’s reasoning may be correct if all other conditions are same as evidence is given of the fact that Helios is attempting to attract industries with innovative technologies and companies focusing or research and development.
Summing up, it can be said that the author’s reasoning cannot be established based on the evidence given in the argument.
My argument is as under:
The author comes to a conclusion that corporations should look to Helios while they are expanding their business or seeking new business opportunities. One of the reasons given for this conclusion is the low unemployment rate in Helios. One evidence that is given is Helios inclination to expand its economic base by attracting R&D focused companies.
One logical flaw in the reasoning is that the author has assumed a correlation between low rate of unemployment in a place and growth of industries in the region. The author has assumed that if a place is having low rate of unemployment, it means that a new industry will also thrive. The author fails to look at the point that low unemployment rate may be due to the fact that people in Helios are ready to accept unskilled jobs like factory workers, storekeepers in godowns etc because of the low levels of literacy.
Another flaw is that the author has assumed that all industries are of same nature. For example, a software development company that requires high quality of technical engineers cannot get good software developers even though the place can be very well suited for manufacturing or labour intensive industries.
However, the author’s reasoning may be correct if all other conditions are same as evidence is given of the fact that Helios is attempting to attract industries with innovative technologies and companies focusing or research and development.
Summing up, it can be said that the author’s reasoning cannot be established based on the evidence given in the argument.
let me give the power of perseverance.............
