Please rate the following essays.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AWA ESSAYS: Analyze Argument
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared as part of a campaign statement for Velazquez, who is seeking election as alderman in the town of Barchester:
"Under Police Commissioner Draco, the city of Spartanburg began jailing people for committing petty crimes such as littering, shoplifting, and spraying graffiti. Criminals in Spartanburg must have understood that lawlessness would no longer be tolerated, because the following year Spartanburg saw a 20% drop in violent crimes such as homicide. Our town should learn from Commissioner Draco's success, and begin a large-scale crackdown on petty crime."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
YOUR RESPONSE:
In this argument, the author cites the campaign statement for Velazquez, who is seeking election as alderman in the town of Barchester. In his campaign statement, Velazquez cites an example that under Police Commissioner Draco, the city of Spartanburg began jailing people for committing petty crimes such as littering, shoplifting, and spraying graffiti. Then he assumes that criminals in Spartanburg must have understood that lawlessness would no longer be tolerated, because the following year Spartanburg saw a 20% drop in violent crimes such as homicide. Considering this he concludes that Barchester should learn from Commissioner Draco's success, and begin a large-scale crackdown on petty crime. However, I strongly feel that his argument seriously flawed and very unconvincing. The reasons for the same have been discussed in the subsequent paragraphs.
First, Velazquez assumes that the drop of 20% in the violent crimes was due to the strictness introduced on committing petty crimes such as littering, shoplifting, and spraying graffiti. He assumes the relation: "A occurs after B, thus A caused B", which is completely flawed. It is possible that the decrease in the violent crimes such as homicide was due to some other reasons such as increased harmony among the society members, etc. So in order to strengthen this, he needs to understand the real reasons that cause the drop in violent crimes.
Second, he assumes that due to the strict restrictions on petty crimes, the criminals in Spartanburg must have understood that lawlessness would no longer be tolerated and thus leading to drop in the violent crimes. This is completely unconvincing as he fails to consider the restrictions, penalty, and other measures that were introduced on committing violent crimes. It is possible that the drop in the violent crimes is due to certain other measures introduced by Police Commissioner Draco. Velazquez should look for such reasons, if any. Also, he should support his stance with some concrete reason, where he can show that the drop in violent crimes was due to jailing people for committing petty crimes. Unless provided with such a concrete reason this argument stands weak.
Finally, I would conclude that this argument, as it is, is completely flawed and unconvincing. However, it can be strengthen by supporting it with the measures taken by Police Commissioner Draco to control the violent crimes. Also, it needs to use some concrete reasoning to prove that it was the jailing people for committing petty crimes that caused the drop in violent crimes. Unless supported by aforementioned things the conclusion that introduction of large-scale crackdown on petty crime will lead to drop in violent crimes stands null and void. Hence, I will concur the argument is very weak.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AWA ESSAYS: Analyze Issues
ESSAY QUESTION:
"Since no business can be all things at once, companies that specialize in one product or service are more efficient than those that offer a diverse product mix."
From your perspective, how accurate is the above statement? Support your position with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
YOUR RESPONSE:
Whether companies that specializes in one product or service are more efficient than those that offer diverse product mix? Some people might argue that a company concentrating on one product or service is more efficient while some might argue that a company concentrating on diverse product mix are more efficient. This issue is really a controversial but on a closer look of facts and studies, one can conclude that the companies that offer a diverse product mix is more efficient.
The chief reason for such a stance is that the company offering diverse product mix has more sources of income than compared to a company that specialize in one product or service. Because money is power, the company with more source of income can put more money into its research and development for some particular product, thus leading to a better sales of that product without compromising the diversity of its products. The risk taking capability is more for the company with diverse product mix. This can be shown using an example of a company such as Google. It offers various services to customers , thus diversifying its sources of income and hence increasing its risk taking capability. Thus, the revenue generated is optimally utilized in the enhancement of its products and services with more concentration on its major product that is its search engine.
The other reason to support such a stance is that I feel actually concentrating on one product or service would certainly inhibit you growth in today's world. The primary reason is that one limits the avenues of incomes. This can be shown using the example of the company I-Flex Solutions, which only concentrated on the financial software products and services. This helped in getting a good name in the financial industry, but in the end it was acquired by the Global Software Firm Oracle, which has diverse product mix. In this competitive scenario in which "Big Fish eats Small Fish", it is certainly a good option to diversify your products, while at the same time concentrating on any specific product or service.
Some people might argue that concentrating on one product or service helps you in being best in that service or product. But on the contrary, I would argue that it makes you most vulnerable during a financial recession or depression. I would supplement this using an example of telephone service company that offered very good messaging rates as well as good service, but during the recent recession, it suffered from decline in funds and thus had to lay off employees irrespective of their good performance in the past.
Finally, to conclude, I certainly feel that the benefits of having diverse product mix certainly outweighs the benefits that a company gets on specializing in one product or service. The reasons for the same has been discussed above. Also, in this competitive scenario and such a cut-throat competition the point "Since no business can be all things at once" doesn't stand valid. The more diverse product a company has, the more the number of sources of income and hence the more the risk-taking capability of the company.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------