GRE Essay - Please review!

[rayray1]

Prompt: SuperCorp recently moved its headquarters to Corporateville. The recent surge in the number of homeowners in Corporateville proves that Corporateville is a superior place to live than Middlesburg, the home of SuperCorp's original headquarters. Moreover, Middlesburg is a predominately urban area and according to an employee survey, SuperCorp has determined that its workers prefer to live in an area that is not urban. Finally, Corporateville has lower taxes than Middlesburg, making it not only a safer place to work but also a cheaper one. Therefore, Supercorp clearly made the best decision.

 

Response: 

The following argument is flawed for numerous reasons.  The arguement assumes that non-urban places are safer to live, that the number of homeowners in an area is indicative of how popular it is to live in that area; and that people always want to live close to where they work.  

The argument assumes that all non-urban areas are safer places to live then urban areas.  Though this generalization may hold true in many cases, it is not always true.  For example, some of the safefast places to live can be found within some of America's largest citites such as New York City and Chicago.  This fact allows us to assume that some non-urban areas can actually be more dangerous to live in than some urban areas; meaning Corporateville could acutally be a less safe place to live than when compared to Middlesburg. If Corporateville is actually more dangerous than Middlesburg Supercorp could be losing potential employees that hold a safe work environment as a priority when seeking out a job.

The arguement also assumes that an increase in number of homeowners is a reflection of how people feel about living in an area.  However, this logic is flawed.   Corporateville could be having a surge in the number of homeowners due to the fact that the housing market has crashed.  If this were the case houses everywhere, not just in Corporateville, would be more affordable.  Therefore, the surge in the number of homeowners seen in Corporateville could be occuring nationwide and not an indication of how people feel about living in that area.  

Lastly, the argument assumes that people want to live close to where they work.  While a shorter commute can be enticing to many some people prefer to keep some distance between where they work and live.  Just because someone may perfer to live in non-urban area they may enjoy working in the high paced environment that a city has to offer. By assumming all employees would prefer to live in the same area that they work Supercorp could be losing potential employees who prefer to keep their work like more separate from their personal life 

Because the argument makes several unwarranted assumptions it is not valid.  Moving the headquarters from Middlesburg to Corporateville could have been a smart decision for Supercop to make but the reasons listed do not provide the support necessary to make this arugement valid.