GMAT Essays (AWA)

The following appeared in the personal finance section of a popular magazine:

"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."

RESPONSE:
The author states that the price of an acre of land in the United States is 50 times of what it was in 1970 and 200 times of what it was in 1920. Also, the nation's population is projected to keep increasing even though the amount of land remains constant. Therefore people who are approaching retirement should invest in real estate to secure themselves financially. In the preceding statement, the author claims that" Therefore, people who are approaching retirement should invest heavily in real estate to ensure their financial security." Though this claim may well have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument based on several questionable premises and assumptions and based solely on the evidence the author offers, we cannot accept his argument as valid.

The primary issue in authors reasoning lies in his unsubstantiated premises. The price of land increasing as compared to what it was in 1970's and 1920's may not be the only factor for people looking for retirement to invest in land. Also, a projection is not necessarily true, for example, it may be the case that the ratio of death and birth may be similar and the population may remain constant. Furthermore, people can invest in other things also for ensuring their financial security, such as shares, gold etc. The authors premises, the basis for his argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support that render his conclusion unacceptable.

In addition the author makes several assumptions that remain unproven. The author assumes since the price of land has been increasing since 1920's, it will keep on increasing in the near future. Moreover, even if the price does not increases population will defenately increase, but the author assumes just the increase in population and not the decrease, for instance, what if deaths are more than births or the ratio of deaths and births may remain constant, this is not considered by the author. Also, the assumption made regarding people approaching retirement to invest heavily in real estate may not be accurate as people may look for other options as investment, such as gold, silver, shares. The author weakens his argument by failing to provide explication of links between land as the only factor of investment and people approaching retirement to invest in land heavily; he assumes exists.

While there are several issues with authors premises and assumptions, that is not to say that the entire argument is without base. The author could provide examples to support his argument, he could provide the reason for population increase. The author could also compare the ratio of death rate and birth rate, showing that birth is more than death, which could strengthen his argument. In addition to this he could also mention the explicit reasons as to why people approaching retirement should invest in land only. Though there are several issues with authors reasoning at present, with research and clarification he could improve his argument significantly.

In sum, the authors illogical argument is based on several unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumption that render his conclusion invalid. The author could give reasons as to why the nation's population is projected to keep increasing and also give more support as to why people approaching retirement should invest heavily in land. If the author truly hopes to change his readers mind, he would have to largely restructure his argument, fix the flaws in his logic, clearly explicate his assumptions and provide evidentiary support. without these things his poorly reasoned argument will likely convince few people.