Writing Feedback / 'clean, beautiful, safe Shopping Center' - GRE-Argument [3]

The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner.
"Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels."

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.

________________________________________
While it may be true that the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing due to the increased number of skateboarders, the author's argument does not make a cogent case for the city to prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. It is easy to understand why store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza, but this argument is rife with holes and assumptions, and thus, not strong enough to lead to a skateboarding prohibition.

The author reports that the number of shoppers has decreased over the past two years. It is not clear, however, if the skateboard users are the main reason. For example, have the store owners assessed the costumers' opinion through simple questionnaires to determine what may have influenced the shoppers' decision about Central Plaza? Has another shopping center offering better services and amenities been established in the City? We just do not know. Unless fully representative, valid, and reliable facts are used to effectively back the author's argument.

Additionally, the author implies that there has been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. While these senseless acts hurt communities in general and affects directly business operations, a concrete connection between the amount of litter and vandalism and the skateboard users is not effectively made. Even though there have been complaints from the store owners, we do not know if there have been numerous complaints from a wide range of shoppers, or perhaps from one or two who made numerous complaints. To strengthen his/her argument, the author would benefit from providing specific examples from former or current costumers.

Building upon the implication that costumers do not come to the Central Plaza due to the amount of skateboarders, the author suggest that a prohibition of skateboarding will result in increased business levels. If problems like littering, vandalism, among others are caused by people who practice skateboarding, this may be true. For example, if shoppers stop visiting the plaza because of its hygiene conditions or fearing to be attacked or harmed by someone riding a skateboard, this conceivably could be remedied. But if another shopping mall has opened its doors in the vicinity of Central Plaza, and it offers better options for the shoppers, such as secured parking, clean areas, playground, sales discounts or a food-core, this may not be true. Some shopping centers really offer fancy amenities and this definitely sways people's decision independently of having skateboarders using their common areas. Consequently, skateboarding prohibition may have no impact upon the level of business in Central Plaza. Regardless of whether the businesses in Central Plaza are able to improve or not, the author's argument is not completely sound. The evidence in support of the conclusion that the prohibition will cause higher level of business does little to prove that conclusion, since it does not address the assumptions already raised.

A clean, beautiful, safe Shopping Center often adds to a city's property values, leads to increased tourism and revenue from those who come to take advantage of it facilities, they also promise parents a safe haven for their children with guarantees of guns, drugs, and crime free environment and a better overall quality of life for residents in the nearby areas. For these reasons, city government may decide to prohibit the skateboarding. However, this author's argument is not likely significantly persuading the city government to approve the prohibition of Skateboarding at Central Plaza.