The following advice was given to a politician by his political consultant: "It is true that 200 apartment renters protested in the rain about the elimination of rent control regulation. However, there are 20,000 renters in the entire city. 19,800 of them stayed home and did not protest. The group that did not protest is much larger and better represents the opinion of renters throughout the city that the elimination of rent control is not a problem. You should not let the small protest discourage you."
Describe how well reasoned you find this argument. In the 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 argument's conclusion. You may also address possible changes in the argument that would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
________________________________________
It has been obvious that rent has gone up significantly in the last 5 years. In 2006, one can find the comparable apartment for 2 at $1100 per month, now going for $1600. Rent control regulation becomes a hot topic evidently. However, with the above argument stating the statistics of less than 15% of renters showing concern over rent control, the author attempts to show that it is not a big issue with elimination of the rent control regulation. Although his claim may have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on questionable premise and assumption, I can not accept his argument to be valid.
First of all, this argument is based on the fact that 200 out of 20,000 renters protested in the rain against elimination of rent control. However, one needs to consider many other avenues renters are showing their protest such as in writings, onlines forums, calls, as well as in other ways not yet explored. Therefore, this evidence presented is not giving a complete picture of renters' attitude.
Another reason why this argument needs improvement is the assumption of that renters' protest is the only way to express their acceptance of the elimination. Many landlords understand the nature of renters, who do not communicate well at times about their wishes. Often times, they would skip paying rent as a way to show their resentment, yet they are not well equipped to communicate what they wish. It may be due to lack of language or simply a way of life.
This argument would be much more validated if the author would explore nature of the renters. Are they not protesting due to lack of care, knowledge, or truly not an important issue. This would make this argument much more validated.
Describe how well reasoned you find this argument. In the 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 argument's conclusion. You may also address possible changes in the argument that would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
________________________________________
It has been obvious that rent has gone up significantly in the last 5 years. In 2006, one can find the comparable apartment for 2 at $1100 per month, now going for $1600. Rent control regulation becomes a hot topic evidently. However, with the above argument stating the statistics of less than 15% of renters showing concern over rent control, the author attempts to show that it is not a big issue with elimination of the rent control regulation. Although his claim may have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on questionable premise and assumption, I can not accept his argument to be valid.
First of all, this argument is based on the fact that 200 out of 20,000 renters protested in the rain against elimination of rent control. However, one needs to consider many other avenues renters are showing their protest such as in writings, onlines forums, calls, as well as in other ways not yet explored. Therefore, this evidence presented is not giving a complete picture of renters' attitude.
Another reason why this argument needs improvement is the assumption of that renters' protest is the only way to express their acceptance of the elimination. Many landlords understand the nature of renters, who do not communicate well at times about their wishes. Often times, they would skip paying rent as a way to show their resentment, yet they are not well equipped to communicate what they wish. It may be due to lack of language or simply a way of life.
This argument would be much more validated if the author would explore nature of the renters. Are they not protesting due to lack of care, knowledge, or truly not an important issue. This would make this argument much more validated.
