argument143 oceanus4月作文小组3月28日第三次作业

oceanusUID：2283238

感觉最近写的argument都停留在这个水平上了，不知到有什么突破的方法吗，谢谢
TOPIC: 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.
WORDS: 344         TIME: 0:55:00          DATE: 2007-3-28

In the argument, the author firstly comes to a conclusion that one of the national newspaper's recent articles on corporate downsizing in the United Sates is misleading. Then the author quotes a recent report which contradicts the article to support the argument, which seems logical.

However, the author only says the report, which is quoted to demonstrate the argument, is on the United States economy, and says nothing about the reliability and the detail of the report. Perhaps, there is not enough people to participate in the survey which is said in the report. Or perhaps the people who take part in the survey is not representative. It is possible that the majority of the responders are those who lost their jobs have found new employment. Moreover, the questions of the survey may be derivational. In a word, the reliability of the report is suspicious if the author can not provide other forceful evidence.

Otherwise, even the survey of the report is unfeigned, there are still some problems in the argument. First, the author cites that since 1992 far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated, but he or she does not mention the exact number of increased jobs. To say the least, even the number is very large, the proportion of the increased jobs to increased population may be infinitesimal. Secondly, the author mentions nothing about the detail of the jobs which were found by those who lost their jobs. It is possible that the jobs are very tiring and pay little money. Thirdly, will the unemployed man be competent for the created jobs? The created jobs are full-time and may need a lot of technologies, moreover they are possible fatiguesome. On the contrary, the unemployed man is senile in all probability. So it is possible that the unemployed man can not find a good job.

Overall, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. Unless the author provides sufficient evidence to demonstrate the reliability of the report and to rule out other reasonable alternatives, the author will not persuade me.

vivien3773UID：2308910

Inthe argument, the author firstly comes to a conclusion that one of thenational newspaper's recent articles on corporate downsizing in theUnited Sates is misleading. Then the author quotes a recent reportwhich contradicts the article to support the argument, which seemslogical.

However, the author onlysays the report, which is quoted to demonstrate the argument, is on theUnited States economy, and says nothing about the reliability and thedetail of the report. Perhaps, there is not enough people toparticipate in the survey which is said in the report. Or perhaps thepeople who take part in the survey is not representative. It ispossible that the majority of the responders are those who lost theirjobs have found new employment fast. Moreover, the questions of the surveymay be derivational. In a word, the reliability of the report issuspicious if the author can not provide other forceful evidence.

Otherwise, even the surveyof the report is unfeigned, there are still some problems in theargument. First, the author cites that since 1992 far more jobs havebeen created than have been eliminated, but he or she does not mentionthe exact number of increased jobs. To say the least, even the numberis very large, the proportion of the increased jobs to increasedpopulation may be infinitesimal. Secondly, the author mentions nothingabout the details of the jobs which were found by those who lost theirjobs. It is possible that the jobs are very tiring and pay littlemoney. Thirdly, will the unemployed man be competent for the createdjobs? It  is possible that the created jobs are full-time and (may )need a lot oftechnologies, or perhaps(moreover they are possible) they are fatiguesome. On the contrary,the unemployed man (is )may senile in all probability. So it is possible thatthe unemployed man can not find a good job.

Overall, the argument isunconvincing as it stands. Unless the author provides sufficientevidence to demonstrate the reliability of the report and to rule outother reasonable alternatives mentioned above, the author will not persuade me.

最好能把第三段分解开层次清楚点， 我也感觉最近越写越退步了，还是坚持写吧，会有收获的。