GRE Sample Essay 18

Response for GRE Sample Essay

The letter provided above outlines the issue of the considerable price rise of a carton of cream in the market and associated it with the greed of farmers to make more profits. While the former is a fact drawn from reports and analyzed over time, the latter is more of an ill-conjecture directed intentionally against the farmers. In concrete terms, the letter’s direction is significantly influenced by a judgemental, inconclusive, subjective, and opinionative bias that lacks much-required evidence. As a consequence, it is obvious as to why a reader cannot agree to the sentiments expressed above.

To begin with, the author emphasizes a 25 percent increase in the number of farms in Relanna, which might be a definite number considering the relative increase in population. However, the fact that the author fails to address the rise in population leaves the factual presentation as incomplete. This makes one believe that he presupposes that the population is a constant and, therefore, doesn’t contribute to the production ratio. However, according to the economics of inflation, population growth plays a significant role in determining the production ratio. No mention of the population accounts for no indication of the demand-supply law, something that leads towards a fragmentary estimation of the production ratio and, eventually, inflation.

Also, the writer asserts that recent innovations in milking technology have acted proportionally to the efficiency of the milking process. But, he fails to address the cost involved in the employment of technology and the subsequent delivery of materials. In concrete terms, there is no account of the internal costs that contribute to the manufacturing aspects such as resource gathering, size-estimation, packaging, and quality monitoring among others. Moreover, there is no indication of the probable cost of adopting machinery and administering it over the course of a production. Hence, the generalized perspective over the price inflation is flawed and isn’t supported by the shreds of evidence, which further adds to the incredulous formulation of the events pertaining to the rise in cream carton price.

Further, the writer jumps to the extraordinary rise in the price of a carton of cream. This rise, however, can be guided by a local market salesman or retailer. For instance, the delivery of most of the packaged products includes the cost of packaging, i.e., industrial cost, transportation cost, storage cost, and retailing cost. In that sense, the farmer generates little per manufactured item. Even if there are not-so-many intermediaries in reaching the end customer, inflation doesn’t need to have been fuelled by farmers. Thus, it becomes evident that the writer has subjected the letter to a bias that fails to consolidate the nature of business levels between the manufacturing of the product and its destination, which is the end-user. In simple words, it is based on an idea that does not align with the previously defined reasons that highly pertain to economics.

All-in-all, the facts incorporated by the author inadequately reflect upon the situation. While they might exhibit a little coherence, they are indecisive and insufficient to comment upon the probable cause of inflation. That said, it becomes highly opinionated on the author’s part to use the statement against the farmers and appears that the author is biased against the community. The author needs to add more information to his stance to add credibility to his claims and justify his position against the farmers. After all, it is highly irrational to comment upon the source of inflation without having plausible pieces of evidence.