Argument143 【加州阳光】第9次作业，sandy求拍

sandyfriendUID: 157486

TOPIC: ARGUMENT143 - The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a national newspaper.

"Your recent article on corporate downsizing* in the United States is misleading. The article gives the mistaken impression that many competent workers who lost jobs as a result of downsizing face serious economic hardship, often for years, before finding other suitable employment. But this impression is contradicted by a recent report on the United States economy, which found that since 1992 far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated. The report also demonstrates that many of those who lost their jobs have found new employment. Two-thirds of the newly created jobs have been in industries that tend to pay above-average wages, and the vast majority of these jobs are full-time."

*Downsizing is the process in which corporations deliberately reduce the number of their employees.
WORDS: 478          TIME: 0:59:39          DATE: 2006-7-12

Merely based on unfounded assumption and dubious evidence the statement draws a conclusion that the misleading of recent article on companies downsizing. To support the conclusion, the arguer point out evidence that more jobs have been created than have been eliminated and most of the employees who are fired find new jobs.  in addition , he indicates that  most new job offer a better pay for employees and most of are full-times. On the surfaces, it seems logical; however, in actually, this alone neither provides impelling evidence to make the argument sound not organizes a logical argument in favor of the conclusion.

To begin with, the fact that more jobs have been created than have been eliminated since 1992 does not justifies that those who lost the jobs meet the requirement of the new opportunities.  With the society development, new jobs may need more comprehensive employees, while disappear ones may only need single skillful men.  Liking the worker in the factories, in 1930, the worker can be hired if he can use the spanner; now need operates the computer.  If such workers lost the job, it is highly possibility that they can not meet the need of new ones and find any jobs.  Thus the reader's refute is weak.

Another fallacy the arguer commits is that although many retired men have found new employment in the recent report, it does not rule out the possibility that they suffer serious economic hardship before finding other suitable jobs.   The survey can not demonstrate the actual time span before fired find a new one.  if the span are average six to ten months, many employee may  suffer economic crisis; if the span are more longer,  the outcome may be more severe.   Hence, more detail and evidence should show to support the arguer's idea.

Finally, newly created jobs with high wages in the survey does not means that
many workers can get the job with high pay ; also mostly providing the full-times job does not show that the worker can easily find a job with full-time.
In the report, there are still one-thirds of the newly created job are under the average wages, maybe, the worker can only  accord with the requirement of such job and accept the pay below the average .  In the same condition, worker may have considerable possibility to work at part-time, not full time.  The arguer should show more details about the pay and job styles.

Overall, this argument is no persuasive as it stands. To make it more convincing, the arguer has to provide more evidence concerning whether the newly created job can meet the fired employee. To better evaluate the argument, we need more concrete evidence that the worker may not suffer economic before employment and the exact information about the pay and job styles, otherwise the argument is logically unacceptable.