Splitting the issues of cost-efficiency and environmental impact highlights an ambiguity in the claim that railway shipping is more appropriate. On the one hand, it may be appropriate, or prudent, for me to ship furniture by rail because it is cost-effective; on the other hand, it might be appropriate, or socially correct, to encourage more railway shipping because it is environmentally sound. The argument thus trades on an equivocation between social correctness on the one hand, and personal or business prudence on the other.

　　In sum, this argument is a confusion of weak comparisons, mixed issues and equivocal claims. I would not accept the conclusion without first determining: the factors relevant to tax structure, whether specific tax benefits should accrue to property as well as to income and capital gains taxes, whether railway shipping really does provide greater social benefits, and whether it is correct to motivate more railway shipping on this basis.

　　小编提醒：考生们可在日常生活中多读范文，多练笔，培养出好的语感和逻辑，这样才能在考试中写出优秀的作文。

【GMAT作文：Argument范文精选（27）】相关文章：

★ GMAT作文范文精选（9）

★ GMAT作文范文精选（20）

★ GMAT作文：Argument范文精选（6）

★ GMAT作文：Argument范文精选（7）

★ GMAT作文：Argument范文精选（9）

★ GMAT作文范文精选（29）

★ GMAT作文：Argument范文精选（12）

★ GMAT作文范文精选（38）

★ GMAT作文范文精选（30）

★ GMAT作文范文精选（16）