ARGUMENT143 [REBORN FROM THE ASHES] TASK ONE bynvligre

nvligreUID: 2689384

第一次在论坛发作文。弄了半天都没搞懂怎么发帖子。好多链接和论坛的规则都不是很明白。真是失败。看来这是不经常上论坛的坏处。555555以前的作业都发的乱七八糟的不知道草木版主有没有看到。以后要努力了。





  In this letter ,the editor claims that recently the report about corporate downsizing in American is misleading.he cites some reponses about the newly created jobs in USA more than the eliminated ones and many of people who lost their jobs  have found new employment .well-ground case they may seem ,however several fallacies.
        firstly,a threshold problem with the argument omits the presupposition that is far more jobs have been afforded than have been eliminated since 1992 .At the same time ,people who needed jobs have sharoly increased.even the number over the provided postions .yet the editor offers no evidence to support that.
        Another point woorth considering is that the report demonstrates that many unemployed have found new jobs .this report seem to be obscured ,the number or percentage of people who have found new employment has not provided by this report may be the number of them constitus an insufficiently smaple.It is entirely possible that this survey only asked ten people and eight people reponsed to they had got new jobs.
        Furthermore,the editor aslo commits the fallacy of "all things are equal".companied that tend to paly above average wages created two -thirds of positions.however ,it not equal that people could earn above average wages when they do these jobs .The sorts of factors might that have contributed to wages ,such as the quality of job,the ablity of worker and the benifits of this company.
         least but not last, even if many people get new job ,maybe these people have not adapt to the new position ,and they just regard this job as transition .they will lose their jod again after several weeks.
        In summary ,the argument is seriously flawed in several critical repects.To strengthen it the editor must do a new survery about unemployment and new employment.

fancywwUID: 2583671

拼写、语法错误就不说了。
一开始我看迷糊了，作者到底是在批editor还是在批驳speaker？
此外，套话很多，实质性的内容比较少。