[a习作temp] Argument 143第一篇求拍，留连回拍 [复制链接]

chennanhua
UID: 2721993

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 2
寄托币: 205
注册时间: 2009-11-6
精华: 0
帖子: 10

发表于 2010-1-3 21:40:46 |显示全部楼层

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.
2010-1-3 9:30-11:45
475 words

The arguer assert/propose in this argument that the article reported in the national newspaper gives a mistaken impression to public. To support his claim, another report on the United States economy is cited by the author, which claim that the jobs opportunities have persistently increased since 1992 and many workers who lost their jobs have found new jobs with a appropriate paying and almost full-time. The author's attitude seems acceptable at first glance, however, it's not logical after rationally analyzed.
The author falsely depends on the gratuitous assumption that the report on the United States economy is fully convincing. However, we can find no evidence to support the facticity of the report. Is the article rolled out by an authority after concrete investigation or it's just blurted out by an anonymous person without any survey but by hypothesizing? Even if the report is based on some survey, how the survey is conducted? are there enough employees and respondents in this survey? Whether the survey is random sampling? If the survey is conducted by the irresponsible surveyors who finished the survey by themselves, or perhaps only few employees and respondents joined in this survey, moreover, perhaps the employees are selecting, any one situation mention here will result in unreliable survey to bolster the author's claim.
Even assuming the report on the United States economy is acceptable, the assumption is untenable rested on the report. For example, although more jobs have been created than have been eliminated from 1992, it’s possible that the quantity of workers is increasing more quickly than the jobs increasing speed, thus the employment situation will become more and more grim. And there's possible that the jobs have been created several years ago, but in recent years, not only no newly jobs are created but more are eliminated. In addition, the report confirms many of those who lost their jobs have found new jobs, but how many? It's possible that one thousand workers have found new employments, it really many, but what about the situation if there are one million workers lost their jobs? Two-third of the new jobs pay above-average wages and many of these are full-time, but it doesn't mean that they are suitable employment for the workers, and the workers who got them will never face serious economic hardship, for the newly created jobs require the workers, who could obtain more pay need just part time work before, to work full-time but get few pay now. further more, the newly created jobs such as dustmen and salesmen probably not satisfy the competent workers who may have special skills in teaching, management, research and so on.
To sum up, even if the article reported in the national newspaper really is misleading, the arguer should provide more reasonable survey and put forth his argument with substantial evidence that could properly drawn it.