ARGUMENT143【0706G－cheer作文互改小组第十二次作业】

flyyuhaoUID: 2248478

143.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.


你们最近关于美国集体裁员的文章是有误导性的。该文章给人们一种错误的印象，即很多在企业面临严重经济困难的时候裁员而导致失业的有能力的工人通常要用几年的时间找到另一份合适的工作。但这种感觉与最近一次关于美国经济的报告相矛盾，报告发现自1992年以来新增的就业机会数量远超过消失的岗位数量。该报告也指出很多失业人员已经找到了新工作。新增就业机会中有三分之二是那些提供高于平均水平薪酬的企业提供的，而且这些岗位绝大多数是全职工作。


提纲：
作者的推论完全建立在这篇报道，但报道没有提供任何数字与证据，无法判断它的真实与准确。先以它真实为前提，论者的推理中有问题。
1.新设的岗位多，岗位数量也许仍然不够，人口在增多，有更多的人要找工作。缺乏具体的数据。也许新增的就业机会仍然不能满足需求，因为人口的增多导致失业率不降反升。
2.找到工作的失业人员不一定是那些因裁员而失业的人。新近毕业需要工作的人得到了这些工作，那些被裁员的人仍然失业。况且新设的工作不一定是好工作，也许那些失业的人之前的工作比现有的工作好很多。
2.被裁员的工人可能无法得到那三分之二的工高资和全职岗位。因为岗位工种限制、技术限制、年龄限制。
3.很多失业人找到工作，不是全部，而且也许用了很多年。失业人数也在增加。


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: 484         TIME: 0:28:29          DATE: 2007-3-5


This argument is based on a recent report, which lacks any valuable statistic and evidence that makes it no as convincing as it stands. Assume that this report is reliable, however, the argument's demonstration is still logically illed, upon which my contentions lies.

To begin with, the report, which said that far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated, do not necessarily demonstrate that the employment ratio in United States has been improved. Maybe more jobs are created, coinciding with the population's increase, which results in that more people are to be employed. The report lacks enough detailed information and statistics upon this. We cannot rule out the possibilty that the newly supplied jobs still cannot cater the increasing need of working opportunities. Due to the increase of population and working people, the employment rate might decline rather than go up.

The author cannot conclude that the people, who are recently employed, are just people who lost jobs as a result of downsizing. For example, newly graduted people might get the job, while those who are fired during the period of downsizing are still out of job. Furthermore, newly supplied jobs are possibily not as good and comfortable as those of before. It is entirely possible that the fired people have had much better and much more paid jobs than they do now.

Furthermore, those who lost their jobs may not be the ones who get the new working opporturnities. Newly created jobs may need those who have professional skills and certain working experience, which those fired people may not be equipped with. Besides, as time passed, those people would be too old for some jobs, such as secetary, bule collar jobs or just some which need patient and passion. Actually, companies and factories would prefer to hire those who are young and energeti for that they are more creative and may bring numerous passion into their job.

Before I come to my conclusion, it is necessary for me to point out another flaw that weakens the logic of this argument that the argument only mentioned that many of those unployed have found new employment. Then what about the rest of them? What the exactl number does the 'many' refer to? If the total number is large and the ratio of those newly employed is low, quite a few people would still be unemployed. Besides, how many years did these people remain unemployed before they get job? Unless the author provide information on this, we cannot deny that these people have faced serious economy hardship for a long time before they get job.

In sum, before the author draw his conclusion, he need to study and investigate the report more deeply and carefully. The report is not reliable enough to support the arguer's standpoint. To better evaluate this argument, he need to provide accurate statistic on the employment situation in United America.

seedtpUID: 2240849

This argument is based on a recent report, which lacks any valuable statistic and evidence that makes it no as convincing as it stands. Assume that this report is reliable, however, the argument's demonstration is still logically illed, upon which my contentions lies.

To begin with, the report, which said that far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated, do not necessarily demonstrate that the employment ratio in United States has been improved. Maybe more jobs are created, coinciding with the population's increase, which results in that more people are to be employed. The report lacks enough detailed information and statistics upon this. We cannot rule out the possibilty that the newly supplied jobs still cannot cater the increasing need of working opportunities. Due to the increase of population and working people, the employment rate might decline rather than go up. [这里我还驳斥了一种情况，就是提供的新工作是否在兴趣上，环境上，福利上都满足下岗者的要求，这些都将使得他们没有找到合适的工作]

The author cannot conclude that the people, who are recently employed, are just people who lost jobs as a result of downsizing. For example, newly graduted people might get the job, while those who are fired during the period of downsizing are still out of job. Furthermore, newly supplied jobs are possibily not as good and comfortable as those of before. It is entirely possible that the fired people have had much better and much more paid jobs than they do now. [最后一句和你要驳斥的本段内容好像没有什么联系啊]

Furthermore, those who lost their jobs may not be the ones who get the new working opporturnities. Newly created jobs may need those who have professional skills and certain working experience, which those fired people may not be equipped with[一般来说，这些下岗工人要比新手有经验的啊]. Besides, as time passed, those people would be too old for some jobs, such as secetary, bule collar jobs or[这些工作似乎对年龄的要求也不是很明显] just some which need patient and passion. Actually, companies and factories would prefer to hire those who are young and energeti[energetic] for that they are more creative and may bring numerous passion into their job.

Before I come to my conclusion, it is necessary for me to point out another flaw that weakens the logic of this argument that the argument only mentioned that many of those unployed have found new employment. Then what about the rest of them? What the exactl number does the 'many' refer to? If the total number is large and the ratio of those newly employed is low, quite a few people would still be unemployed. Besides, how many years did these people remain unemployed before they get job? Unless the author provide information on this, we cannot deny that these people have faced serious economy hardship for a long time before they get job.[论证得很充分，这段不错，借鉴一下 ^_^]

In sum, before the author draw his conclusion, he need to study and investigate the report more deeply and carefully. The report is not reliable enough to support the arguer's standpoint. To better evaluate this argument, he need to provide accurate statistic on the employment situation in United America.