In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating, and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes litt

Essay topics: In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating, and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. For years there have been complaints from residents about the quality of the river’s water and the river’s smell. In response, the state has recently announced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water sports is, therefore, sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this year’s budget to riverside recreational facilities.

Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

prakharsharma's picture

The author,of the proposal given to increase the budget for Mason City's riverside recreational activities, offers an efficient and interesting argument but it contains some serious hidden flaws. Therefore, to take this proposal further, would require more logical information as well as to look upon those hidden flaws.

In the survey, residents' love for water sports was reported but it did not show up to how much extent the residents will use river for water sports. Whether they would do it only on weekend or in vacations or on daily basis. Also, if the water sport did not go regularly, then the condition of the river would again deteriorate.

According to the author, the survey gave residents the only choice of water sports. If they would have given them the choic of other uses like hydroelectric dam, use of water for drinking purposes etcetra,then the choice of residents would definitely be different.

Additionally, the objection arises that would government do her work seriously seeing the past records or corruption woulld be the interference? The point is valid because previously the amount of money alloted for river cleaning was not used properly leading to the contamination of river.

Also, according to the given flawed survey, if government accepts the proposal then from where the money would be derived from? Would it be fair if the budget of medical programs, education programs, infrastructure programs be deducted and given to the Mason city's recreational activities?

Nonethless, the development of the river would make the city beautiful. Therefore, government should give the water sports tender to the residents near by.This would not only give daily wages to the people at job but also give revenue to the government by increased tourism.Thus, the author;s argument does not justify the increase in budet for Mason city's recreational activities.

Essay Categories: 
Votes: 
Average: 6 (2 votes)
This essay topic by other users:
Post date Users Rates More about the essay
1 day 9 hours ago Iman102 59 Read full essay
4 days 4 hours ago chapagain08 78 Read full essay
1 week 4 hours ago seonjungkim 50 Read full essay
1 week 2 days ago p2312vasant 58 Read full essay
1 month 1 day ago kevlarpeng 48 Read full essay
1 month 2 weeks ago LGI 61 Read full essay
1 month 3 weeks ago King kobra 59 Read full essay
2 months 2 weeks ago dd123 50 Read full essay
2 months 2 weeks ago sjf 66 Read full essay
4 months 1 week ago Lokesh Varshney 40 Read full essay

Pages

More essays by this user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 11, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , of
The author,of the proposal given to increase the budg...
^^^
Line 3, column 92, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had given'?
Suggestion: had given
...he only choice of water sports. If they would have given them the choic of other uses like hydro...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 204, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , then
...e of water for drinking purposes etcetra,then the choice of residents would definitel...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 147, Rule ID: NEAR_BY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'nearby'?
Suggestion: nearby
...he water sports tender to the residents near by.This would not only give daily wages to...
^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 155, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: This
... sports tender to the residents near by.This would not only give daily wages to the ...
^^^^
Line 6, column 274, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Thus
... to the government by increased tourism.Thus, the author;s argument does not justify...
^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, look, so, then, therefore, thus, well, as to, as well as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 19.6327345309 41% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 13.6137724551 15% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 28.8173652695 42% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 55.5748502994 65% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1585.0 2260.96107784 70% => OK
No of words: 302.0 441.139720559 68% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24834437086 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1687104957 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85233141179 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 204.123752495 80% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.543046357616 0.468620217663 116% => OK
syllable_count: 494.1 705.55239521 70% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.4490102503 57.8364921388 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.923076923 119.503703932 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2307692308 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.46153846154 5.70786347227 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.245980091998 0.218282227539 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0895950674278 0.0743258471296 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.06641889228 0.0701772020484 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125300373547 0.128457276422 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0462859999185 0.0628817314937 74% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.01 8.32208582834 108% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 98.500998004 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.

Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 307 350
No. of Characters: 1544 1500
No. of Different Words: 163 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.186 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.029 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.686 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 106 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 77 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 60 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 43 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.615 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.919 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.615 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.372 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.372 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.097 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5