Re: [寫作] 再一題AA

看板GMAT (GMAT入學考試)作者 (Lit.S)時間16年前 (2009/10/09 16:08), 編輯推噓0(000)
留言0則, 0人參與, 最新討論串2/3 (看更多)
1.過去SH與PG鄰近地區的房價相似,不代表永遠都會一樣。 可能是SH有甚麼改變了...像是便利的交通網啊,居民福利提升等等...造成住屋 需求成長,價格也飆升 2.SH的房地產價格成長不見得就是overprice,要從供給及需求來衡量,搞不好以後會更高 3.即使SH的房地價格被高估了,也不能就說買PG的房子就好,說不定PG自己的價格才是被 高估咧,或是不買在SH也可以買在其他的地方,誰說一定要買PG ※ 引述《denizee3 (妮)》之銘言: : The following appeared in a letter from a part-owner of a small retail : clothing chain to her business partner: : “Commercial real estate prices have been rising steadily in the Sandida : Heights neighborhood for several years, while the prices in the adjacent : neighborhood of Palm Grove have remained the same. It seems obvious, then, : that a retail space in Sandida Heights must now be much more expensive than a : similar space in Palm Grove, which was not the case several years ago. So, : it appears that retail spaces in Sandida Heights are now overpriced relative : to those in Palm Grove. Therefore, it would be in our financial interest to : purchase a retail space in Palm Grove rather than in Sandida Heights.”) : 請問一下這題Argument可以從哪些論點下去反駁呢? : 謝謝! -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 60.245.108.189
文章代碼(AID): #1ApkzdPk (GMAT)
討論串 (同標題文章)
本文引述了以下文章的的內容:
完整討論串 (本文為第 2 之 3 篇):
文章代碼(AID): #1ApkzdPk (GMAT)