argument143 『勇往直前小组』第十五次作业linshao

linshaoUID：2338229

题目：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.
你们最近关于美国集体裁员的文章是有误导性的。该文章给人们一种错误的印象，即很多在企业面临严重经济困难的时候裁员而导致失业的有能力的工人通常要用几年的时间找到另一份合适的工作。但这种感觉与最近一次关于美国经济的报告相矛盾，报告发现自1992年以来新增的就业机会数量远超过消失的岗位数量。该报告也指出很多失业人员已经找到了新工作。新增就业机会中有三分之二是那些提供高于平均水平薪酬的企业提供的，而且这些岗位绝大多数是全职工作。
In this argument, the author claims that the workers who lost jobs do not face a serious economic hardship. However, careful scrutiny of the argument reveals some dubious assumptions which render it unconvincing.

In the first place, the author makes the conclusion based on a dubious assumption that the workers who lost jobs will get job. However, there is no evidence to demonstrate that. No information about the condition of these workers. The mere fact that more jobs are offered these years than eliminated is insufficient to support the author's conclusion. The author neglects the increase of population. It is possible that the population significantly increased these years, many children grown up and need to work. Perhaps more old people continue their work but rather than retired.  If so, the will be few occupations available for these workers. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author's argument will be unpersuasive.

Even granted that many jobs are offered to these workers, the author's claim that the workers are not face economic hardship is still unconvincing. Maybe few of these workers have found comparative good jobs, and others may take in a scant payment jobs which ordinary people do not want to do. Some of the jobs they found might be part-time one, therefore they may still in the great fear of losing jobs. If so, they remain facing the hardship in economics. Without the information about the real financial condition of them, we can not be persuaded by the author's claim.

Finally, the fact that above-average wages are offered by the newly created jobs is meaningless. No evidence to shows that such jobs are available for the workers. Common sense tells us that by the development of technique, many new technical industries emerge, and these industries need more employees with the high-tech knowledge, such as electronic business, software business like video game, the consult business and etc.  However, perhaps these workers who had once lost jobs have few skills in such industries, and they may hard to get jobs in such industries. It is hard to get a job as computer software designer for a worker from car industry. It is possible that many of the employees are from universities and colleges. It is entirely possible that many people shift their jobs to new better one. Thus these new jobs with above-average wages will be unavailable for the workers, thus the author’s argument remains unsound.

In sum, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. To better support it, the author should provide more information about the true condition of these workers who had lost jobs.

xiongnashiongUID：2359406

题目：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.
你们最近关于美国集体裁员的文章是有误导性的。该文章给人们一种错误的印象，即很多在企业面临严重经济困难的时候裁员而导致失业的有能力的工人通常要用几年的时间找到另一份合适的工作。但这种感觉与最近一次关于美国经济的报告相矛盾，报告发现自1992年以来新增的就业机会数量远超过消失的岗位数量。该报告也指出很多失业人员已经找到了新工作。新增就业机会中有三分之二是那些提供高于平均水平薪酬的企业提供的，而且这些岗位绝大多数是全职工作。
In this argument, the author claims that the workers who lost jobs do not face a serious economic hardship. However, careful scrutiny of the argument reveals some dubious assumptions which render it unconvincing.

In the first place, the author makes the conclusion based on a dubious assumption that the workers who lost jobs will get job(我觉得作者没有这个意思啊). However, there is no evidence to demonstrate that. No information about the condition of these workers. The mere fact that more jobs are offered these years than eliminated is insufficient to support the author's conclusion. The author neglects the increase of population. It is possible that the population significantly increased these years, many children grown up and need to work. Perhaps more old people continue their work but rather than retired.  If so, the will be few occupations available for these workers. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author's argument will be unpersuasive.

Even granted that many jobs are offered to these workers, the author's claim that the workers are not face economic hardship（原文中作者是用来反驳，在没找到合适工作之前，你把这个条件改了） is still unconvincing. Maybe few of these workers have found comparative good jobs, and others may take in a scant payment jobs which ordinary people do not want to do. Some of the jobs they found might be part-time one, therefore they may still in the great fear of losing jobs. If so, they remain facing the hardship in economics. Without the information about the real financial condition of them, we can not be persuaded by the author's claim.

Finally, the fact that above-average wages are offered by the newly created jobs is meaningless. No evidence to shows that such jobs are available for the workers. Common sense tells us that by the development of technique, many new technical industries emerge, and these industries need more employees with the high-tech knowledge, such as electronic business, software business like video game, the consult business and etc.  However, perhaps these workers who had once lost jobs have few skills in such industries, and they may hard to get jobs in such industries. It is hard to get a job as computer software designer for a worker from car industry. It is possible that many of the employees are from universities and colleges. It is entirely possible that many people shift their jobs to new better one. Thus these new jobs with above-average wages will be unavailable for the workers, thus the author’s argument remains unsound.

In sum, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. To better support it, the author should provide more information about the true condition of these workers who had lost jobs.
这题我觉得比较麻烦的就是，论据似乎很难和结论对上，你觉得是一个对一个吗……..囧