78. In this editorial the author argues that improvements to existing city services as
well as new services should be paid for by developers rather than by taxpayers1. In
support of this opinion the author points out that developers can make large profits from
building projects and that these projects increase the demand for city services and raise
the city's expenses, I disagree with the author's opinion for two reasons.
First, the fact that developers stand to make profits from their projects is not a
good reason to require them to pay more than their fair share of the cosplayts of services. In
fact, to require them to do this in order to win approval of their projects is tantamount to
robbery. City officials would find it difficult to justify2 a policy that endorsed3 this
practice. Moreover, the adoption4 of such a practice would discourage the development
of new buildings in the city.
Second, the increase in demand for city services as well as the increase in the
city's expenses will be most likely offset5 by the tax revenues these projects generate.
Consequently, unless the author can demonstrate that the city will incur6 expenses that
are not covered by the increased revenues from these projects, the author's concern
about these issues is unfounded.
In conclusion. I find the author's reasoning on this issue unconvincing. To
strengthen the argument the author would have to show that the city would be harmed
financially by approving new building projects
相关文章推荐
