Argument143 【0706G－LOVEAW小组】第15次作业

小猫儿UID: 2297873

143.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.

1、  报告的可靠性
2、  就业机会增多不一定提供给了失业人员，同样，高薪工作和全职工作不一定给了失业人员
3、  许多人找到了工作可能更多人找不到，而且找到的也可能找了好几年
0:30-0:58  words 449
The arguer arbitrarily draw the conclusion that the job-finding situation of the workers who lost jobs is not as worrying as discussed in an article. However, close scrutiny reveals the letter unconvincing.

In the first place, the economic report cited in the letter is suspicious. The arguer provides no detailed information whether the report are executed in a proper way. It is indicated that amount of jobs created is much larger than that of jobs eliminated, while the arguer fails to show any detailed data, without which we have no idea how much larger the amount is. It is possible that the arguer considers a hundred as a large amount while the total number of jobs eliminated is a million, which is a thousand times as large as a hundred. Also, chances are the executor of the report has a unjust point of view so that he tampered the data recorded in the true report. Without ruling out such possibilities, I can not simply accept any results in the report.

In the second place, high job chances can not simply lead to high employment of those who have lost their jobs. Similarly, those high salary jobs and full-time jobs are not ensured to be given to those who lost their jobs. It is fairly possible that these jobs are preempted by the large quantity of students who just leave school, as we all know that there is even larger a number for the graduates looking for jobs. In such case, it can not be audaciously concluded that the situation for job-losers looking for new jobs is not so bad because of the large number of jobs.

In addition, the arguer uses the fact that many have found new jobs to show the content job provided situation, which is also impeachable. Even if many have found new jobs, the arguer obviates to tell us the number of those who have not found new jobs. It is fairly possible that a hundred people have found gratifying jobs while a million people have not, which is a hundred times as big as the former data, which indicates that far more people still do not have jobs. Moreover, even if most of them have found new jobs, it is quite possible that they have been looking for the present job for seven years or a much longer time, as the article on cooperate downsizing have pointed out. Without providing detailed information to solve the inquiry, I can not accept that reasoning from the fact many people who lost jobs have found new jobs.

To sum up, the arguer draws a opinionated conclusion on basis of a series of doubtful evidence and impeachable reasoning.