value of property. Moreover, the author seems to think that cost-effectiveness and
environmental soundness are equally relevant to the question of tax relief. However,
these are separate considerations. The environmental soundness of a practice might be
relevant in determining tax structuring, but society does not compensate a business for
its cost-efficiency.
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
【GMAT考试写作指导:Argument范文三十】相关文章:
最新
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02