The following appeared as an editorial in one of Coleville’s city newspapers.

“Even though a high percentage of Coleville City’s businesses failed last year, we who live in Coleville City should keep in mind the fact that the Coleville region has attracted a great many new businesses over the last three years. It is well known that new businesses are, on average, much more likely to fail than are long-established ones, so the business failures should not be considered a sign of poor economic health. Indeed, many analysts regard the presence of a significant number of new companies among a region’s businesses as a sign of economic health. Thus Coleville City appears to be in good, not poor, economic shape.”

The above article was published in an editorial of Coleville’s city newspaper and the arguer, in spite of the poor performance of the region’s businesses in the past year, wants to support that the city is in a good economic shape. The first argument which the arguer gives to support his stand is that Coleville has been of great interest to the new businesses over the past three years and also the arguer blames new businesses for the failure in the previous year. The second stand which the arguer gives in support of the city’s good economic shape is that many analysts think that the new companies among the city’s businesses are a sign of economic health.

The first argument given by the arguer is absolutely baseless as the exact number of businesses that failed last year is not given which will determine the economic health of the city. It would be absolutely insignificant to mention the attraction for the new businesses without giving the exact reason of the failure. There is a possibility that there was no scope for the new businesses as the older ones were fulfilling the city’s needs. It is also possible that the working conditions in regard to labor, raw material and climate were not in favor of the businesses. The arguer fails to mention the exact reason of the failure. The arguer says that the city has attracted business in past three years and there is no mention of the performance of businesses earlier than that period. It is quite possible that during a certain period the businesses of the city flourished and after that again they saw a low phase. The arguer fails to mention whether the new or the existing businesses failed as it is not clear in the argument. On one side the arguer is talking about the new businesses pouring in and on the other hand he blames the new businesses as a sign of economic health. The arguer is very confused in his recommendations.

The second recommendation which the arguer makes in support of his argument is also dubious. The arguer has not mentioned the number or percentage of analysts who gave this statement. The arguer fails to present before us the official reports which show that the city is not in a bad economic state. The arguer has not mentioned the annual performance of the new or old companies. The study again is very confusing as on one hand the new businesses are blamed for the poor performance of the businesses and at the same time they represent the good economic state of the city which is absolutely baseless.

The arguer has not provided us with any substantial report or figure which would justify the recommendation made by him that the economic state of Coleville city is in good shape. The argument in favor should be more precise and accurate in order to make the arguer’s stand stronger.