Another argument, review appreciated....

[Edmund.Shi]

confused with my argument, pls rate and help me improve

"In the computer hardware division last year, profits fell significantly below projections, the product line decreased from twenty to only five items, and expenditures for employee benefits increased by 15 percent. Nevertheless, Consolidated's board of directors has approved an annual salary of over one million dollars for our company's chief executive officer. The present board members should be replaced because they are unconcerned about the increasing costs of employee benefits and salaries, in spite of the company's problems generating income."

Discuss... etc

answer:
********************
To bolster his assetion that the present board members should be replaced, the author reasons that by replacing these members, the company will achieve its goal in cutting total costs, pressumes that cutting the costs of employee benefits and salaries can produce higher incomes, and buttresses that, despite of the conpany's generating income problems, these board members are unconcerneed about the soaring costs of employee benefits and salaries. This seemingly well-supported argument, however, in my estimation, is ill-founded. The following paragraphs will explore its paradox.

To begin with, the argument depends on a vague premise that cutting the costs of employee benefits and salaries can produce higher incomes. However, the premise is gratuituos because the author provides no evidence to support it. While cutting total costs appears an empirical element in skyrocketing revenues, other neglected scenarios, such as increasing the productivity, employing new market policies, if feasible, would demonstrate that attractive incomes can be obtained through other means other than reducing employee benefits and salaries. Therefore, until the author can eliminating such critical criteria, the conclusion cannot be reached.

Additionally, the arguer unfairly suggests that Consolidated's board's approval of an annual salary of over one million dollars for their company's chief exevutive officer shows their disconcern of the increasing spendings of employee benefits and salaries. The arguer remarkably undermines other motives such intending to raise the company's productivity or make the chief exevutive officer more loyal to the company may help to exlain the board director's approval. Accordingly, the argument cannot be accepted until the author can eliminating such motives.

Last but not least, without proving that no middle ground can be negotiated or providing any justification for imposing such a choice, the arguer unfairly suggests that an either-or choice must be decided--- either the board members be replaced, or the profits continue to decrease; however, common sense and personal experience hint us that these shareholders may negotiate with the board to give birth to a better solution.

In conclusion, the argument, though plausible at first glance, is delicate and of no cogency. To deeper convince the readers, the author should rule out negelcted criteria relevant to maintaining higher profits; to better support the argument, the arguer ought to clear other motives of the board director's approval; and to further solidify the conclusion, the illstrator could demonstrate that negotiating with the board cannot solve the problem. In a word, only with more rational reasoning can this argument be more persuasive.

[abhishek_mumbai]

Are you using a template?
If you are then I believe that you picked a wrong template for this argument.. I don't see any either-or-choice in this argument..

It is all a good essay with lots of nice words.. but the speaker draws its conclusion from the opinion that board of director are not concerned at all.. I see that you raised this point in para 3rd para but it should have been 2nd para..

in 1st para.. the argument doesn't conclude that they are trying to increase profits by reducing benefits.. You could have focused more on CEO - new hire or an example from the past when new CEO has helped company in recovering from losses.

this is all my opinion.. you should get 4.5-5 for this essay

[totoro]

I found the essay bit wordy, and in my opinion, this increases the risk of making more gramatical mistakes. Also, your use of semicolon is incorrect.

Overall, i find the reasoning throughout solid, just need to improve on sentence structure and grammar.