hmnshu

Thank you @HealthPolicyPhD for your thorough read and feedback. And I would like to see your responses to my further AWA posts.:)

In my opinion, if you have 3 months and dedication to learn English use Norman Lewis : Word Power Made Easy else go with Magoosh GRE Vocabulary Flashcards.

Argument Task: The following appeared in a memorandum from the owner of Movies Galore, a chain of video rental stores. “In order to reverse the recent decline in our profits, we must reduce operating expenses at Movies Galore’s ten video rental stores. Since we are famous for our special bargains, raising our rental prices is not a viable way to improve profits. Last month our store in downtown Marston significantly decreased its operating expenses by closing at 6:00 P.M. rather than 9:00 P.M. and by reducing its stock by eliminating all movies released more than five years ago. Therefore, in order to increase profits without jeopardizing our reputation for offering great movies at low prices, we recommend implementing similar changes in our other nine Movies Galore stores.” Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation. Essay: The argument claims that Movies Galore is being in loss and to regain profit, they must reduce operating cost by limiting store hours and remove 5 years old stock from the stores. Stated in this way the argument reveals examples of leap of faith, poor reasoning and ill-defined terminology. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is weak and has several flaws. First, the argument readily assumes that they are famous of offering movies at low prices and increasing rates doesn't look like viable solution. This statement is a stretch with no evidence supporting whether increasing rates would have caused any issues so far. And it does not provide idea of market analysis which would have made them stay with low rates. For example, if company offers good quality with low cost makes it obvious for them to gain from it. If they plan not to increase rates and check whether it generates money or not. Clearly, store won't get to know whether prices they offer is very low with respect to operating expenses which would have been damaging revenue since long time. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated that it was tested before which did not end well. Second, the argument claims that only way to make profit is by reducing operating store expenses with no information from the store where it is already applied whether it was profitable or not. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between operating cost decrease and profit from it. To illustrate, The store where they changed closing time to 6:00 PM instead of 9:00 could lose customers renting movies after 6:00 PM which is actually usual time when people think of renting movie for spending evening hours with their home theatre. While, Removing 5 year old stock also undermines argument as people always tend to watch movies which is high in recommendation and that could be more than 10 years old. In fact, it is not at all clear if there was profit with new methods rather planning to start same logic in other stores. If the argument had provided evidence that the store has gained then the argument would have been a lot more convincing. Finally, owner's plan could be invisible and based on his experience and instinct by decreasing availability of stock and daily schedule timing which could push fear of loss for customers and reign back on movie rental market. Still, was it owners deliberate plan? How would reducing operating cost marks profit? Do we have solid ground to make use of new plan? Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence. In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts about new method stats and customers feedback and if there is deliberate plan which is not discussed. In order to assess the merits of a certain decision, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. In this particular case profitable plan is based on mere weak assumption with no proof. Without this information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.

Please make sure posting instructions as well and feel free responding my post and flaws exist in it if any. The argument claims that All college and university students would benefit from spending at least one semester studying in a foreign country. One semester lasts for only five to six months. Isn't it very short period? Stated in this way the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws. First, the argument readily assumes that students travelling abroad will meant to learn trivial tasks such as caring a pet or knitting sweater. Additionally taking care of pet helps achieves sense of responsibility. This statement is a stretch as no would travel this long if they suppose to learn for only learning sense of responsibility towards pet. For example, student effort towards understanding and learning new language and culture demands development for mankind. And if student visiting abroad only meant to surviving with no life in cosmopolitan city not bringing prosperity to lives of other people or at least friends and family than it is no use. Clearly, trivial task and new language learned in six months will fade away in no time if not polished or used after flying back. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated that there is responsibility of student developing his capabilities towards benefits of mankind. Second, the argument claims that student living away from your home, family and friends help build character and life in solitude protecting himself rather than building friendship and relationships which can be used further to intellectual development of both the parties. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between abroad study and growth of humanity. To illustrate, there have been lot of chaos in news about people studying abroad gets miserly. There study suffers and most of their time spends in trivial labour tasks such as cleaning, subway deliveries etc. In fact, it is not at all clear that whether study makes him perfect to grow in his life rather it talks about only culture, language and trivial task expertise. If the argument had provided evidence that some students study has shown tremendous growth in development for both the countries then the argument would have been a lot more convincing. Finally, will people benefit from this six months travel? is there any growth associated for student? Different elaborate real world example exist if any? Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence. In summary, the argument is flawed and therefore unconvincing. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors.

Please review below essay: Some people believe that corporations have a responsibility to promote the wellbeing of the societies and environments in which they operate. Others believe that the only responsibility of corporations, provided they operate within the law, is to make as much money as possible. Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented. Essay: This topic raises the controversial issue of whether Corporation have responsibility to enlighten wellbeing of the Societies and Environments in which they operate or not. Everyone have different point of view based on their experience. Indisputably, corporations runs and are more concerned about growth and profit they make from their business. Nevertheless, how much they make relies on people working for them and their productivity towards companies growth, and surroundings supporting flexibility in how they operate. Thus, I generally disagree with the opinion that only responsibility of corporation is to make money provided they work within law, and would argue that as corporation work because of people and environment they operate in, they indeed owes responsibility to promote the wellbeing of the societies and environments. First of all, Growth of these corporations are marked by people who use their Products, work for them, society enduring their presence. And I would like to point out that corporation accelerates development of the society. To illustrate, let us look at the example of tech giants such as Facebook, Google, Microsoft, amazon etc. who are at top corporates with wealthy investors, shareholders and geek employees. Let's take example Hyderabad City, Microsoft built India Headquarters which has given jobs to Technical Scholars plus work to many illiterate labourers as a part of maintenance, After their initiation in City, there is new wave of growth in Hyderabad which has transformed whole city into IT Hub. In this regard, obviously corporate has direct impact on the people and how it changes society. Consequently, it is pretty obvious that the development of corporation is correlated with development of the Society. Furthermore, if corporation only believe in making money and not caring for environment around it, then that investment won't sustain long. For example, Damages caused by Gulf OIL Spillage is still known to many. How it polluted environments and inhabitants living in that Area, it was catastrophic. Both common sense and personal experience have told us that growth is true only when all are growing else it is loss. Hence, all the evidence above demonstrates that Corporate have responsibilities towards society, environment and making money won't be a real growth as it won't last long. Admittedly, Some corporation with low budget has risks while taking decision on responsibilities they poses towards society. This is true especially when it comes to Corporation having huge funding and ten times profit. In addition, corporates do have responsibilities towards their employees and rentals which they have to pay on time. However, the above argument does not constitute a sufficient support to claim that all corporates are running low and have no money for the society or keeping in mind environmental impacts while building any type of chemical factory. Because some corporates simply believes in filling their own pockets, and ignoring their responsibilities intentionally. In conclusion, although some people support corporation to not involving in growth of the society or environment they operate, but their development is done by societies and friendly environment in which their people work. As long as some areas are involved, Corporate responsibly holds towards benefits of the people. In fact, Government should involve setting corporate auditory body to oversee corporates based on their revenue.