ARGUMENT143 [REBORN FROM THE ASHES] TASK ONE by wunonomei 观点奇特，求拍

wunonomeiUID: 2717257

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.

4hours, 509words, 2009/12/16
修改了拼写和语法错误


This argument does not directly hit the target by presenting some report demonstrations without noticing that the basis between the report and the article purpose are totally different.


The author mainly discusses the whole unemployed group of people; while, the article focuses on the competent workers losing jobs for downsizing. These competent workers actually are part of the unemployed men, but this does not necessarily mean they take the same opportunities of work as others in the group. The group consist of all kinds of people-competent men, not so competent men, undergraduates and so on, and various corporations have various preferences for employees. The author can learn this point according to the background information the article implies through the words competent and downsinzing; however, he obviously ignores this and make the wrong assumption the unemployed men equate the competent ones resulting from downsizing. But we can easily assume that the competent ones lose jobs not for their incompetence but for some corporation economic profits. Basically, downsizing results from two conditions: redundant employees for duties and substituting workers for low paid ones. Since the author argues that data shows more jobs have been created than have been eliminated, he will make the conclusion such as the employees are not redundant and they are superseded for people requiring lower payment. This probably means they have more difficulties competing with others for jobs, such as undergraduates in the unemployed group. Thus, the argument will be more convincing if the author make the comparison between the competent unemployed men and others in the unemployed group and pay special attention to the competent ones.

Also the author overlooks the article's main conclusion-serious economic hardship comes to the competent unemployed men. The author fails to supply the time and salary data along with the statement that many unemployed men have found jobs and have above-average wages. The author only refers to above-average wages going to only two-thirds of the newly created jobs while neglecting the left one-third of these jobs. This intentional or unconscious loss weaks the author's point as the lost data may closely relate to the competent group. Even he supposes that the competent unemployed men may get salaries above-average, this supposition does not make a whole reason to refute the point of serious economic hardship. Because the above-average paid job may take a competent man years to get; during this period, he still suffers. In whole the concerns like what kinds of jobs are all these newly created ones, who get these jobs, and how long it takes people to find suitable jobs, are all open to question. Without the information above, the author cannot learn about the hardship of the competent unemployed men because different periods of unemployment, different kinds of jobs, different salary levels make different living conditions.

The author does present some facts about the unemployment, but they have no close relation to the article. In other words, the two are talking about different issues. The author needs more specific details to focus on the article to be more eloquent.

这次作业500字可憋死我了，整整四个小时。因为我的观点是综合性的，所以没什么可说的，初稿才400字，我就不停的看观点的深入，哪里思维跳跃了，补充起来，才终于500字。只是不知道这样做出来的文章是否会过于啰嗦，不够简洁，虽然现在我还没觉得。

可能我的观点比较奇特，求拍。