28. The author concludes that the local transit company must either reduce tares for the shuttle buses that transport people to then- subway stations or increase parking fees at the stations. The reasons offered to support this conclusion are that commuter use of the subway train is exceeding the transit company s expectations, while commuter use of the shuffle buses is below projected volume. This argument is unconvincing because the author oversimplifies the problem and its solutions in a number of ways. To begin with, by concluding that the transit company must either reduce shuttle fares or increase parking fees, the author assumes that these are the only available solutions to the problem of limited shuttle use. However, it is possible that other factors-such as inconvenient shuttle routing and/or scheduling, safety concerns, or an increase in carpools—contribute to the problem. If so, adjusting fares or parking fees would might not solve the problem. In addition, the author assumes that reducing shuttle fees and increasing parking fees are mutually exclusive alternatives. However, the author provides no reason for imposing an either/or choice. Adjusting both shuttle fares and parking fees might produce better results. Moreover, if the author is wrong in the assumption that parking fees and shuttle fees are the only possible causes of the problem, then the most effective solution might include a complex of policy changes—for example, in shuttle fares, parking fees, rerouting, and rescheduling. In conclusion, this argument is weak because the author oversimplifies both the problem and its possible solutions. To strengthen the argument the author must examine all factors that might account for the shuttle s unpopularity. Additionally, the author should consider all possible solutions to determine which combination would bring about the greatest increase in shuttle use.