GRE Argument

GRE Argument

In this argument, the author recommended that the government of Calatrava should decrease the funds allocated to education and increase the funding for city facilities and adult programs. To support this recommendation, the author points out that the birthrate of Calatrava is declining, which results in that the number of students will decrease and the adult population will increase. However, this argument rests on a series of unconvincing assumptions and therefor is unpersuasive.

First of all, citing the declining tendency of Calatrava’s birthrate, the author falsely assumes that the number of students in Calatrava’s public school will decrease. It is entirely possible that the specific number of children is increasing, despite the declining birthrate. For example, 10 babies were given by 50 adults five years ago, and 15 babies are given by 100 adults at present, which results in that the birthrate decline from 0.2 to 0.15 but the specific number of babies raise from 10 to 15. To accurately evaluate this argument, a more detailed statistical survey is needed.

Secondly, even if the number of new babies is truly decreasing, it does not indicate that the number of students in Calatrava’s public schools will decrease in the future. Perhaps the Calatrava’s economic development will fall into a bad situation, which results in that the parents have no enough money to bring their children into expensive private schools. In this situation, It is entirely possible that the number of students enrolled in public schools will increase in the next decade. As a result, to decide whether the funds budgeted for education should be reduced, a survey for the parents’ willing is needed.

Thirdly, the author falsely equates the declining birthrate to the rising adult population. Perhaps it is the declining adult population rather than the declining number of babies that results in the low birthrate. In this situation, the recommendation that the funding should relocate to city facilities and programs used by adults is totally false. To evaluate this argument, a detailed statistical survey containing the tendency of Calatrava’s adult population is needed.

Finally, even if the Calatrava’s government truly has the responsibility to reduce the funding allocated for recreational facilities, it does not indicate that the money to fund city facilities and adult programs is sufficient. The argument provides no evidence that the Calatrava’s economic situation will increase in the next decade, which indicate the possibility that all kinds of programs and infrastructure could be less funded. To better evaluate this argument, a report about Calatrava’s development is needed.

In sum, the author’s recommendation is simply not credible, at least based on this plan.