ARGUMENT143 [REBORN FROM THE ASHES] TASK ONE by C。

123runfordreamUID: 2697608

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.

More jobs have been created then eliminated since 1992; those who lost their jobs have new ones, and even two_ thirds of them are better and full time. Basing on there two general reasons, the author thought of the recent article on corporate downsizing in America was misleading to the readers, which gave the readers wrong impression that many competent workers losing jobs are reasoned from the severely hardship of economic before getting their jobs again.

As opposed to the author’s view, I fail to believe that the article would bring wrong impression. According to the author’s analysis, there are four logical problems ignored.

An important one is that the author has neglected the conception of “competent workers”, which may stand for the mid_ class employees, who work in the office for enterprises rather then in the industries. As the author have mentioned below, the two thirds of recreated jobs are suitable for the industries workers before.
Then I am going to look forward to the second point, weather the report that the author has provided is from authorities, such as government ,institutions or not; the thirdly, where did these conveyed happened, were it statewide or nationwide? This factor would lead the figure to a hazy position, confused us. The fourth one is that “the vast majority of these jobs” by the author describing also can cause blur. Exactly how vast it is? Is it including by the two-thirds or other data?


The last but also the most important one that I am concerned, is the comparison of time. The author has traced back to 1992 to comparison the jobs’ recreation with nowadays. Before our furthermore discussion, we should pay attention to the economy history of America during the 1990s to 2000s. There were two periods of time divided, which was 1992—2004 and 2005-2008. According to a charter provided by American Government showed that the unemployed rates had decreased since 1992 to 2000, while it begun to ascend until 2007, the new economic crisis out broke, that is to say, it caused the number of unemployment increase again. The author did not pick a comparable period of time.

Above those arguments I have offered, which including
the data’s accuracy , the scope of investigated places, the period of time compared, the author fails to retort to the article on the prospects of employment.