GRE寫作成為橫在中國學生的理想和現(xiàn)實之間的一大障礙，因此，如何攻克寫作這道屏障，成為擺在我們面前的首要任務。
262
In this memo the manager of a car manufacturing company argues that the company must
add a second plant in order to continue to thrive. To support this argument the manager points
out that its existing plant can only produce 40 million cars, but that according to company
projections 80 million people will want to buy the company's cars. The manager claims that the
company can achieve its objective by operating the new plant on a part-time basis using
workers from the existing plant on a rotational basis. To support this claim the manager points
out that a certain airplane manufacturing company employed this strategy successfully five
years ago. The manager's argument is problematic in several critical respects.
First of all, the manager assumes that no course of action other than the proposed one will
ensure that the company continues to thrive; yet the manager fails to substantiate this
assumption. Since demand is expected to be very high, perhaps the company can continue to
thrive simply by raising the price of its cars. For that matter, perhaps the company can continue
to thrive if it makes no changes at all. Without accounting for either possibility the manager
cannot convince me that building a second plant is necessary.
Secondly, even if building a second plant is necessary for the company to continue to thrive,
in itself this course of action might not suffice. After all, how can the manager reasonably
expect that a second plant will produce as many cars as the existing one if it operates on only
a part-time basis? And if the new plant borrows labor from the existing plant then production at
the existing plant might decline. Thus unless the manager can convince me that the new plant
will be far more efficient than the current plant I do not see any way that operating a new plant
on a part-time basis can double the company's production.
Finally, the mere fact that one certain airplane manufacturer adopted a similar plan with
some success is scant evidence that this car company will succeed ifit follows the manager's
plan. The memo provides no information about how many airplanes the airplane manufacturer
produced. Nor does the memo identify what constituted "success" for the airplane
manufacturer. Perhaps that company considered itself successful by producing only an
additional 10% more airplanes, or by merely managing to avoid bankruptcy. In short, as it
stands the anecdotal evidence about the airplane company is far too vague to lend meaningful
support to the manager's argument.
In sum, the manager's plan seems ill-conceived. To strengthen the argument that the
company must add a second plant to continue to thrive, the manager must at the very least
convince me that the company has no alternative means of achieving this objective. The
manager should also provide evidence that operating a new plant on only a part-time basis
would suffice to double production--perhaps by showing that the new plant would employ
newer, more efficient equipment than the existing plant. To better assess the argument it would
be useful to know what constituted "success" for the airplane manufacturer and, more
specifically, the percentage by which that company increased production as a result of adding
a second plant. 感謝您閱讀《GRE作文范文大全（147） 》一文，出國留學網(wǎng)(liuxue86.com)編輯部希望本文能幫助到您。
262
In this memo the manager of a car manufacturing company argues that the company must
add a second plant in order to continue to thrive. To support this argument the manager points
out that its existing plant can only produce 40 million cars, but that according to company
projections 80 million people will want to buy the company's cars. The manager claims that the
company can achieve its objective by operating the new plant on a part-time basis using
workers from the existing plant on a rotational basis. To support this claim the manager points
out that a certain airplane manufacturing company employed this strategy successfully five
years ago. The manager's argument is problematic in several critical respects.
First of all, the manager assumes that no course of action other than the proposed one will
ensure that the company continues to thrive; yet the manager fails to substantiate this
assumption. Since demand is expected to be very high, perhaps the company can continue to
thrive simply by raising the price of its cars. For that matter, perhaps the company can continue
to thrive if it makes no changes at all. Without accounting for either possibility the manager
cannot convince me that building a second plant is necessary.
Secondly, even if building a second plant is necessary for the company to continue to thrive,
in itself this course of action might not suffice. After all, how can the manager reasonably
expect that a second plant will produce as many cars as the existing one if it operates on only
a part-time basis? And if the new plant borrows labor from the existing plant then production at
the existing plant might decline. Thus unless the manager can convince me that the new plant
will be far more efficient than the current plant I do not see any way that operating a new plant
on a part-time basis can double the company's production.
Finally, the mere fact that one certain airplane manufacturer adopted a similar plan with
some success is scant evidence that this car company will succeed ifit follows the manager's
plan. The memo provides no information about how many airplanes the airplane manufacturer
produced. Nor does the memo identify what constituted "success" for the airplane
manufacturer. Perhaps that company considered itself successful by producing only an
additional 10% more airplanes, or by merely managing to avoid bankruptcy. In short, as it
stands the anecdotal evidence about the airplane company is far too vague to lend meaningful
support to the manager's argument.
In sum, the manager's plan seems ill-conceived. To strengthen the argument that the
company must add a second plant to continue to thrive, the manager must at the very least
convince me that the company has no alternative means of achieving this objective. The
manager should also provide evidence that operating a new plant on only a part-time basis
would suffice to double production--perhaps by showing that the new plant would employ
newer, more efficient equipment than the existing plant. To better assess the argument it would
be useful to know what constituted "success" for the airplane manufacturer and, more
specifically, the percentage by which that company increased production as a result of adding
a second plant. 感謝您閱讀《GRE作文范文大全（147） 》一文，出國留學網(wǎng)(liuxue86.com)編輯部希望本文能幫助到您。