The topic for the following analysis of an issue is in page 764 of the OG(12th edition ). "It is regarding the complaints of people ragarding products wearing out quickly" . i would like to know how much the following essay, that i wrote in about 21 minutes, is likely to fetch if this had been the GMAT?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The argument made above about the longevity of products is not completely justified. I also think that apart from the counter argument presented in the above passage, there are some more reasons to establish that the manufacturing processes involved should aim to curtail the longevity of products to a certain extent.
First, It is not stated clearly what type of products are talked about here. Products like soaps, toothpastes, cooking ingredients etc, commonly categorized as FMCG or fast moving consumer goods, are by definition products that are used on a regular basis and thus used up fairly quickly. On the other hand, Products like air-conditioners, cars etc last for years at a stretch since they are big investments for the customers.
Second, It is assumed that natural resources are wasted. I think using resources to make something useful is completely different from wasting the resource. Furthermore, some natural products like vegetables, oils etc are products that, if left unused, will be rotten fairly quickly. So the best way to stop this is to use them.
Third, Human resources are also not wasted. If all products are made to last for years, then the large number of people working in production factories would become a liability to companies, since for a particular product, production of one batch of the substance would mean a long time till the next batch is produced. Thus, continuous production is necessary for a healthy economy.
Fourth, I also think that continuous production plays a vital role in innovation. Companies try to bring in newer products in order to beat their rivals all the time,
And id customers were to use the same product bought by them many years back, then this drive for innovation will be weakened greatly, if not stopped altogether.
Thus, I strongly oppose the argument presented products should be made to last. The argument can make its case stronger if it mentioned what kind of products it is talking about. It can even suggest for a document agreed on by customers and producers alike, which defines the average longevity for each kind of product. But without such concrete alternatives, I think the complaint about the longevity of products is baseless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S.: i hope i am not violating any copyright laws.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The argument made above about the longevity of products is not completely justified. I also think that apart from the counter argument presented in the above passage, there are some more reasons to establish that the manufacturing processes involved should aim to curtail the longevity of products to a certain extent.
First, It is not stated clearly what type of products are talked about here. Products like soaps, toothpastes, cooking ingredients etc, commonly categorized as FMCG or fast moving consumer goods, are by definition products that are used on a regular basis and thus used up fairly quickly. On the other hand, Products like air-conditioners, cars etc last for years at a stretch since they are big investments for the customers.
Second, It is assumed that natural resources are wasted. I think using resources to make something useful is completely different from wasting the resource. Furthermore, some natural products like vegetables, oils etc are products that, if left unused, will be rotten fairly quickly. So the best way to stop this is to use them.
Third, Human resources are also not wasted. If all products are made to last for years, then the large number of people working in production factories would become a liability to companies, since for a particular product, production of one batch of the substance would mean a long time till the next batch is produced. Thus, continuous production is necessary for a healthy economy.
Fourth, I also think that continuous production plays a vital role in innovation. Companies try to bring in newer products in order to beat their rivals all the time,
And id customers were to use the same product bought by them many years back, then this drive for innovation will be weakened greatly, if not stopped altogether.
Thus, I strongly oppose the argument presented products should be made to last. The argument can make its case stronger if it mentioned what kind of products it is talking about. It can even suggest for a document agreed on by customers and producers alike, which defines the average longevity for each kind of product. But without such concrete alternatives, I think the complaint about the longevity of products is baseless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S.: i hope i am not violating any copyright laws.
