Argument143 [中华龙第14次作业,球拍啊球拍]

Ammmy2000UID: 2265680

Issue 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.

=====================================================================

In this letter, the arguer claims that the recent article about the downsizing is misleading due to a recent report on the United States economy, which found more jobs have been created since 1992. Moreover, the author also cites that many of the layoffs have found new employment and two-thirds of the jobs have been created in industries. Clear scrutiny of these factors; however, reveals that none of them lends credible evidence to support his claims.

To begin with, a recent report on the United States economy is insufficient to substantiate the author's assertion. On the one hand, little information about the scientific instruments or survey methodology is informed. Without such detail information, it is entirely possible that the report is concerning about some regions, which could hardly represent the nationwide conditions. On the other hand, even though the report is convincing, it does not mean that the new created jobs are suitable for those who are jobless. For the author fails to provide the information about the types of new jobs and the layoffs' own conditions, maybe new jobs are for those who have high education whereas the jobless are those who only graduate from high school. Without ruling out these reasonable possibilities, the author fails to convince us about the report.

Moreover, the term of 'many' is too vague for us to make any conclusion. Lacking of precise data, different individuals may have various definition of the word 'many'. Some may think only ten or twenty people could be regarded as many, while others may think thousands of individuals could amount to many. Even though we could reach an agreement that many refer to the number above thousand, the proportion of those who find jobs in the jobless may also be limited. To this extent, how could we make a conclusion that the jobless could find new employment merely by the information of 'many'?

In addition, the arguer considers that two-thirds of the newly created jobs could address the problem of downsizing, which he assumes that these jobs could be suitable for those layoffs and the wages paid are enough for their living. However, the assumption is short of any sufficient evidence. Perhaps the created jobs in industries aim for some high education graduates or senior managers, who have a long time of management experience. At the same time, the jobless are all workers, attaining little education or seldom owning experience of managements. Even though the works are suitable for them, we are never informed about economic markets and inflation. The salary maybe higher than the average, but if the economy is in recession, we could hardly assure that what they gain now is higher than they used to. It is entirely possible that they have trouble in living even having job. Not until the author could provide more evidence, can we believe his claim.

To sum up, the assertion is dubious as it stands. To bolster his claim, the author should provide more information about the kinds of jobs created and the precise numbers of those who are jobless then find new employment. To better assess the claims, we also need extra evidence about the condition of salary and economic markets as well.