GMAT AWA for help (Question shown in the picture below) The process of deciding location to start new business for corporations can be difficult and complicated. A company will need to consider many different aspects to draw the conclusion. In this argument, the author claims that Helios is a good option for corporations. However, I don't agree with this argument. The reasons are presented as following. First, the argument suffers the problem of oversimplification. The author simply attributes lower unemployment rate when comparing to the regional average to a sign of good location. In fact, the author overlooks other factors. For example, Helios provides less job opportunities than other cities so that the unemployment rate is lower than that of other cities. Unemployment rate can not serve as the only standard of the economic growth during recession of one place. Therefore, the author should take more accounts into the argument. Second, the argument suffers the problem of wrong analogy. The author mistakenly draws analogy between past situation and future development. That Helio has provided more than its share of the region’s manufacturing jobs historically doesn’t mean the situation will continue in the future. Thus, the author should examine the analogy in more depths. Third, the argument suffers the problem of careless conclusion. The author carelessly concludes that as the industrial center, Helio will be a good location for companies to seek new business opportunities. Corporations may lie in different industries. For example, companies providing technology service may not choose industrial center as their headquarters. Also, attempting to expand the city’s economic base by attracting companies that focus on research and development of innovative technologies can’t lead to the conclusion that Helio is the best option for corporations either. As a result, the author should make the conclusion more carefully. To sum up, I don’t agree with the argument because it suffers from problems of oversimplification, wrong analogy, and careless conclusion. To make the argument more complete, the author should take more considerations into account, and examine the conclusion more carefully.