38. The following appeared in the editorial section of a campus newspaper.
“Because occupancy rates for campus housing fell during the last academic year, so did housing revenues. To solve the problem, campus housing officials should reduce the number of available housing units, thereby increasing the occupancy rates. Also, to keep students from choosing to live off-campus, housing officials should lower the rents, thereby increasing demand.”
校園報(bào)紙的社論：
因?yàn)樾@住宅的使用率在過去的學(xué)年中下降了，住宅收入也下降了。為了解決這個(gè)問題，校園住宅辦公室應(yīng)該減少可使用的住宅單元，從而增加使用率。同樣的，為了不讓學(xué)生選擇住在校外，住宅辦公室應(yīng)該降低租金來擴(kuò)大需求。
1， 入住率低可能是因?yàn)閷W(xué)生人數(shù)減少等原因造成的
2， 同時(shí)減少供給和降低房費(fèi)可能會(huì)抵消入住率提高而帶來的收入提高效應(yīng)而有余
3， 就算不會(huì)完全抵消仍然有其他原因影響收入例如說學(xué)生進(jìn)入后的維修等等。
boosting rental maintenance oppressive seriousness trivailize
1， 忽略他因：單純地說問題所在是rent. 但實(shí)際上可能有很多其他的因素：房子的condition, security, cleaning service，noisy surroundings等等。
2， 過去不能推廣到未來：很可能變化了——比如enrollments of students have sharply increased。所以，很可能減少available的數(shù)量可能不是合適的做法。
3， 減少提供的房子，降低房租，很可能導(dǎo)致收入下降。
The author of this article argues that, to reverse declining revenues from campus housing rentals, campus housing officials should decrease the number of available housing units and reduce rent prices on the units. The author’s line of reasoning is that fewer available units will limit supply while lower rents will increase demand, thereby improving overall occupancy rates, and that the resulting increase in occupancy rates will, in turn, boost revenues for the campus. This reasoning is unconvincing for several reasons.
To begin with, the author assumes that boosting occupancy rates will improve revenues. All other factors remaining unchanged, this would be the case. However, the author proposes reducing both the supply of units and their rental prices. Both of these actions would tend to reduce revenues. The author provides no evidence that the revenue-enhancing effect of a higher occupancy rate will exceed the revenue-decreasing effect of reduced supply and price. Without such evidence, the argument is unconvincing.
Secondly, the author assumes that lowering rents will lead to higher revenues by increasing demand. However, it is possible that demand would decrease, depending on the extent of the rent reduction as well as other factors—such as overall enrollment and the supply and relative cost of off-campus housing. Moreover, even if demand increases by lowering rents, revenues will not necessarily increase as a result. Other factors, such as maintenance and other costs of providing campus housing units and the reduced supply of rental units might contribute to a net decrease in revenue.
Thirdly, in asserting that lowering rental rates will increase demand, the author assumes that current rental rates are causing low demand. However, low demand for student housing could be a function of other factors. For instance, the student housing units may be old and poorly maintained. Perhaps students find the campus housing rules oppressive, and therefore prefer to live off-campus; or perhaps enrollments are down generally, affecting campus housing occupancy.
In conclusion, the author of this editorial has not argued effectively for a decrease in the number of available campus housing units and a reduction in rental rates for those units. To strengthen the argument, the author must show that a rent reduction will actually increase demand, and that the revenue-enhancing effect of greater demand will outweigh the revenue-reducing effect of a smaller supply and of lower rental rates.
“Because occupancy rates for campus housing fell during the last academic year, so did housing revenues. To solve the problem, campus housing officials should reduce the number of available housing units, thereby increasing the occupancy rates. Also, to keep students from choosing to live off-campus, housing officials should lower the rents, thereby increasing demand.”
校園報(bào)紙的社論：
因?yàn)樾@住宅的使用率在過去的學(xué)年中下降了，住宅收入也下降了。為了解決這個(gè)問題，校園住宅辦公室應(yīng)該減少可使用的住宅單元，從而增加使用率。同樣的，為了不讓學(xué)生選擇住在校外，住宅辦公室應(yīng)該降低租金來擴(kuò)大需求。
1， 入住率低可能是因?yàn)閷W(xué)生人數(shù)減少等原因造成的
2， 同時(shí)減少供給和降低房費(fèi)可能會(huì)抵消入住率提高而帶來的收入提高效應(yīng)而有余
3， 就算不會(huì)完全抵消仍然有其他原因影響收入例如說學(xué)生進(jìn)入后的維修等等。
boosting rental maintenance oppressive seriousness trivailize
1， 忽略他因：單純地說問題所在是rent. 但實(shí)際上可能有很多其他的因素：房子的condition, security, cleaning service，noisy surroundings等等。
2， 過去不能推廣到未來：很可能變化了——比如enrollments of students have sharply increased。所以，很可能減少available的數(shù)量可能不是合適的做法。
3， 減少提供的房子，降低房租，很可能導(dǎo)致收入下降。
The author of this article argues that, to reverse declining revenues from campus housing rentals, campus housing officials should decrease the number of available housing units and reduce rent prices on the units. The author’s line of reasoning is that fewer available units will limit supply while lower rents will increase demand, thereby improving overall occupancy rates, and that the resulting increase in occupancy rates will, in turn, boost revenues for the campus. This reasoning is unconvincing for several reasons.
To begin with, the author assumes that boosting occupancy rates will improve revenues. All other factors remaining unchanged, this would be the case. However, the author proposes reducing both the supply of units and their rental prices. Both of these actions would tend to reduce revenues. The author provides no evidence that the revenue-enhancing effect of a higher occupancy rate will exceed the revenue-decreasing effect of reduced supply and price. Without such evidence, the argument is unconvincing.
Secondly, the author assumes that lowering rents will lead to higher revenues by increasing demand. However, it is possible that demand would decrease, depending on the extent of the rent reduction as well as other factors—such as overall enrollment and the supply and relative cost of off-campus housing. Moreover, even if demand increases by lowering rents, revenues will not necessarily increase as a result. Other factors, such as maintenance and other costs of providing campus housing units and the reduced supply of rental units might contribute to a net decrease in revenue.
Thirdly, in asserting that lowering rental rates will increase demand, the author assumes that current rental rates are causing low demand. However, low demand for student housing could be a function of other factors. For instance, the student housing units may be old and poorly maintained. Perhaps students find the campus housing rules oppressive, and therefore prefer to live off-campus; or perhaps enrollments are down generally, affecting campus housing occupancy.
In conclusion, the author of this editorial has not argued effectively for a decrease in the number of available campus housing units and a reduction in rental rates for those units. To strengthen the argument, the author must show that a rent reduction will actually increase demand, and that the revenue-enhancing effect of greater demand will outweigh the revenue-reducing effect of a smaller supply and of lower rental rates.