1、Comment m1: 这个例子是用来说明if they dont, they could even jeopardize their own careers，但是我认为这段既然正面说他们的“责任” ，就应该强调主动性，这个例子反而让盈利变得比较被动。Comment m2: 也许是我们的思路不太一样吧，但是我总觉得如果这里写“管理层为了赚钱而使得公司蒙受损失”和题目不是很贴切。因为题目想表达的应该是为了赚钱而不顾社会利益，使他人蒙受损失，而不是因为决策的失误使得本公司利益收到损害。Comment m3: 我觉得哈，如果我写 的话，这段我会作为重点，而不是用一个 moreover做递进。 （阅读
2、里面都可以省略不看了。 。 。 ）TOPIC: ISSUE152 - “The only responsibility of corporate executives, provided they stay within the law, is to make as much money as possible for their companies.“WORDS: 598 TIME: 00:45:00 DATE: 2010-03-22 17:08:51Generally I can identify with the speakers perspective that corporate e
3、xecutives should shoulder the responsibility to make as much money as they can for their companies on condition that their conducts are legal. Nonetheless, so complicated is the issue concerning the duty of corporate executives that other viewpoints could be equally tenable from different angles. As
4、 far as I think, the responsibility of corporate executives oughtnt to be confined to merely making money. In different circumstances, their focus can vary.In most cases, making profits for the companies remain the single most important objective for corporate executives if their conducts stay withi
5、n the law. After all, having a strong and healthy cash flow is generally a guarantee for companies to pursue further development and thus increase their market shares. A corporate executive is authorized, by major shareholders, as the chief manager in a company to run business for the benefits of sh
6、areholders. Therefore, as long as their conduct is within the law, making money certainly seems the ultimate goal for them and if they dont, companies may suffer great loss and they could even jeopardize their own careers. A persuasive example could illustrate my points. Steve Jobs is the CEO of App
7、le Computer and ironically in the 1970s he got fired from his own company due to his unsatisfactory performance in maintaining a strong cash flow for this company and making profits for the sake of shareholders. Later on, with a clear strategy, he came back and re-established himself and Apple has a
8、lways been the mainstream force in the computer market.Nevertheless, there are some situations, especially when the economy is enjoying a boom, money-oriented strategy may not be healthy for companies long-term development. Due to the opportunities provided by the booming economy, business may seek
9、to expand blindly. If corporate executives are merely money-oriented, they may overlook the potential hazards in making money. For example they may seek to increase more liabilities and upgrade their market shares due to the positive picture the economy gives to them, hoping to make as much money as
10、 possible- a dangerous and reckless approach which could results in overvaluing the companies strength and once the market crashes, bankruptcy may be doomed to come. The 2008 financial crisis may prove a good example. Before the economic downturn, everything seems just too good: interest rate is sta
11、ble, theres no sign of inflation and commerce is prospering. Blinded by the false sense of the economy and money-oriented corporate strategy, countless business went bankrupt once the markets bubble is burst, despite the fact that those approaches by corporate executives are within the law.Moreover,
12、 merely making money could lead to negative social reputation and bad morale. Companies are supposed to provide social returns because they accumulate wealth from society. Once too much wealth is mounted in one company without it contributing a single penny to society, ordinary people may feel that
13、the company is not being responsible. And beyond that, if corporate executives are only concerned with making money, they would try every possible means to get money, even by exploiting money from employees, thus resulting in bad morale. In the long term, productivity may decrease, thus it is not co
14、nducive to the companys long-term development.In a nutshell, despite the strong justification in the speakers conclusion that corporate executives are supposed to earn as much money as possible for their own companies, provided Comment m4: 我觉得如果有一个specific circumstance，前面那个moreover的地方可以说“即使在经济环境较好的时
15、候”或者有一个比较明确的对比。Comment m5: 我喜欢这个they obey the law, therere other commitments that they also need to take on and which one of them should be placed as the priority should be in accordance with the specific circumstance.TOPIC: ARGUMENT103 - Blue City Highway had always been notorious for its tight cur
16、ves and poor roadway visibility, and the accident rate there was generally very high. Last year the highway was redesigned to broaden the curves and improve roadway visibility. Drivers report that they now feel much safer driving on the highway and that the redesign has been a big improvement. But t
17、he number of accidents on the highway has not been significantly lower in the six months since the redesign than it was in the six months before the redesign. Therefore, the redesign clearly did not improve the curves and roadway visibility enough to make a difference.WORDS: 465 TIME: 00:30:00 DATE:
18、 2010-03-22 17:08:51The speaker reaches to the conclusion that the improvement made on the Blue City Highway isnt of much use for the reason that the number of accidents hasnt been decreased after the improvement. As far as I think, theres a lack of strong justification in reaching the conclusion an
19、d I find it untenable through the following reasons.To support his view, the speaker reasons that the number of accidents on the highway remains roughly the same in the six months since the redesign than it was in the six months before the redesign. Is this analogy persuasive? First of all, the spea
20、ker fails to specifically compare the condition in the recent six months after the redesign with that before it. Perhaps the six months after the redesign saw much more weather turbulence, a possible hazard that could significantly cause traffic accidents. Without ruling out the weathers influence o
21、n transportation on the Blue City Highway, the speaker cannot blame the ineffectiveness of the redesign. In addition, it could be that the transportation management is different after the redesign. After the improvement, drivers report that they feel more much safer and express their recognition of
22、the highway renovation which may give a false impression to the authority and they may loosen their management on the high way, without which drivers would feel more relaxed. This is another possible cause of traffic accidents and due to this; the speaker also cannot reach to the hasty conclusion th
23、at the improvement itself doesnt make a difference.Second, its insufficient for the speaker to only mention a single number to reach his conclusion. It is very possible that in the six months after the redesign, there has been a large increase of vehicles going on the high way because the curves hav
24、e been widened and road visibility has been improved. Accordingly, the number of accidents will naturally increase. Without comparing the ratio of the number of accidents to the total number of vehicles on the high way in the recent six months with that before the redesign, a single number is far fr
25、om being persuasive.Even if we assume the number of vehicles as the same as that before the redesign, it is still specious. It could be quite possible that the severity of traffic accidents after the improvement is significantly mitigated. In other words, because of the highway improvement, people c
26、aught in the Comment m6: 出现频率很高。traffic accidents suffer less serious injuries than before. In this case, its untenable to conclude that improvement has made a difference.In conclusion, if the speaker comprehensively compares the driving conditions, besides the highway alone, in the six months after the redesign and those before the redesign, or if heshe presents more arguments instead of just a single number, the conclusion would be far more persuasive.
