ARGUMENT143 [REBORN FROM THE ASHES] TASK ONE by pluka

plukaUID: 2721764

写了一下午……不过比issue要好写多了~而且argument比较有意思。

ARGUMENT143 

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.



观点当然是反驳author的看法。
理由有三：
1，作者是以那篇报导为依据的，但那篇报道的内容与article的关注要点其实风马牛不相及。
2，报道不能正确推出关于失业工人的情况。
3，报道本身的正确性和完备性值得怀疑。


The author bases his rebuttal of the article about the economic sufferings brought by corporate downsizing to many competent workers before reemployment on a report, which seemingly demonstrates some optimistic aspects on job marketing. The logical chain between such basis and deduction, however, remains dubious.

First and foremost, neither of the reasons given by the report deals with information concerning the economical hardship those laid-off workers faced during their job-hunting process, which is, in the mean time, the major focus of the article. We read nothing from the report about the cost and time spending on the search of available job vacancies that factually ranks the top of priority for a unemployed worker. Next to that, while the life without a suitable occupation can be painfully depressing, policies concerning unemployment compensation and benefit as well as the perspective of reemployment should be treated seriously. The report, however, leaves no hint on them at all. Hence it is rather apparent that the report provide little contradiction, and, technically, little connection to the hardship before attaining another profession, the main topic of the article.

Nor does the report adress itself to issues of unemployed workers properly, that is to say, the evidences it illustrates do not directly relevant to standpoint the author want to ensure. For one thing, the increased number of job alone can not rightly suggest a larger capacity to meet the demand in job market, as long as the growing population of contemporary applicant is not dealed within this case. For another, those vacancies are open for all, thus there is no justification to guarantee that laid-off workers could win more chances rather than being beaten and robbed by other perhaps younger and smarter applicants. If they can not get the occupation, then, another reason given by the report that many newly created jobs provide higher payment and full-time work would be invalid to prove a betterment in their lives. Following this analysis, the report seems largely beating about the bush without solid deduction.

Furthermore, the adequacy and accuracy of the statement in report is worth questioning. Though it suggests that many laid-off workers have found new employment, it does not talk about how is the working conditions and whether the position is stable or workers there lose or quit their job afterwards. In addition, the word “many” needs more precise definition. Such a subjective description interferes the judgment on whether we can justly neglect those “small” portion of people outside the report statement. Besides, since no background information on researchers and testees of the survey is illustrated, neither any accurate statistics, we find nothing convincible to indicate the authority and validity of the report. 

All considered above, the disputation of the author, with his ground of argument  building on the report, does not hold water when confronting the question whether downsized workers experience economic hardship before reemployment. To be more persuasive, the core of his contention may as well reoriented with the support of specific and solid statistics.


题干里的一些信息有想过，但没有用上，比如full-time job的问题，比如deliberately的问题。最后决定不谈那么多，抓几点有话讲的。

在动笔之前看了同主题写作以及AW逻辑思路的一些链接，感觉很有收获。AW的思路分析还真是充满陷阱。动笔写的时候感觉还好，因为先把大致的几条列出来了。最大的问题还在于遣词造句不熟练，表达一个意思要先停下来斟酌，费时。要开始看范文背句子啦！呵呵，今天上午完成第一篇issue,下午写了第一篇AW,值得纪念的开始呀！


以上，请多多指教！