Please rate and comment my Argument essay.
The following appeared as part of an article in a weekly news magazine.
"The country of Sacchar can best solve its current trade deficit problem by lowering the price of sugar, its primary export. Such an action would make Sacchar better able to compete for markets with other sugar-exporting countries. The sale of Sacchar's sugar abroad would increase, and this increase would substantially reduce Sacchar's trade deficit."
Discuss how well reasoned...
The argument in question states that the country of Sacchar should reduce the price of sugar which they export to solve their trade deficit problem. The argument lacks in evidence by not taking into consideration certain issues as discussed below.
By simply lowering the price of sugar it cannot be guaranteed that there will be more buyers for it. It is understood from the argument that sugar is the primary export of Sacchar, however the argument does not take into consideration the demand for sugar in other coutries to which the sugar is exported. If the countries to which Sacchar exports sugar are satisfied with the current quantities of sugar inflow into the country, lowering the price of sugar by Sacchar wont really help the country much. Unless and until there is enough demand and a good market for the sugar, the argument's strategy will not work.
Secondly, the argument does not take into consideration the quality of the sugar produced by Sacchar. The lowering of price might tempt countries to extend business relations with Sacchar and start buying sugar, but if the quality of the sugar traded is not upto the international standard, it is not going to help the business. Also, if some other country might be offering a better quality sugar for a little higher value as compared to that of Sacchar, countries in need of sugar might as well be ready to pay the premium amount to satisfy their demands.
The argument only concentrates on sugar to reduce Sacchar's trade-deficit, however it does not take into consideration any other areas. It might be the case that Sacchar can actually excel in other industries, but maybe its problem is lack of expertise or technical incompetency. If the country is able to get the required assistance, it might as well be successful in developing a product which is very much in demand internationally. Over dependence of a country on one particular industry or product to take care of its economy and reduce its trade-deficit might eventually turn out to be an unwise idea both for the country and its citizens.
Finally, in conclusion it can be stated that the argument fails to take into consideration many important points such as the demand of sugar in other countries, the quality of sugar produced and other areas of development to explore. Due to the reasons stated above the argument fails miserably to prove its point and seems to be not well reasoned.
The following appeared as part of an article in a weekly news magazine.
"The country of Sacchar can best solve its current trade deficit problem by lowering the price of sugar, its primary export. Such an action would make Sacchar better able to compete for markets with other sugar-exporting countries. The sale of Sacchar's sugar abroad would increase, and this increase would substantially reduce Sacchar's trade deficit."
Discuss how well reasoned...
The argument in question states that the country of Sacchar should reduce the price of sugar which they export to solve their trade deficit problem. The argument lacks in evidence by not taking into consideration certain issues as discussed below.
By simply lowering the price of sugar it cannot be guaranteed that there will be more buyers for it. It is understood from the argument that sugar is the primary export of Sacchar, however the argument does not take into consideration the demand for sugar in other coutries to which the sugar is exported. If the countries to which Sacchar exports sugar are satisfied with the current quantities of sugar inflow into the country, lowering the price of sugar by Sacchar wont really help the country much. Unless and until there is enough demand and a good market for the sugar, the argument's strategy will not work.
Secondly, the argument does not take into consideration the quality of the sugar produced by Sacchar. The lowering of price might tempt countries to extend business relations with Sacchar and start buying sugar, but if the quality of the sugar traded is not upto the international standard, it is not going to help the business. Also, if some other country might be offering a better quality sugar for a little higher value as compared to that of Sacchar, countries in need of sugar might as well be ready to pay the premium amount to satisfy their demands.
The argument only concentrates on sugar to reduce Sacchar's trade-deficit, however it does not take into consideration any other areas. It might be the case that Sacchar can actually excel in other industries, but maybe its problem is lack of expertise or technical incompetency. If the country is able to get the required assistance, it might as well be successful in developing a product which is very much in demand internationally. Over dependence of a country on one particular industry or product to take care of its economy and reduce its trade-deficit might eventually turn out to be an unwise idea both for the country and its citizens.
Finally, in conclusion it can be stated that the argument fails to take into consideration many important points such as the demand of sugar in other countries, the quality of sugar produced and other areas of development to explore. Due to the reasons stated above the argument fails miserably to prove its point and seems to be not well reasoned.
