Argument143 【0706G－LOVEAW小组】第十五次作业 by iq28

iq28UID: 2152875

马上就要上火车了
今天的作业我就一起现在就发上来了~
暂时表改哈
猫你昨天的作业我已经改过了 welcomebs你今天的作业我明天晚上到学校会改的^_^


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: 477          TIME: 0:28:08          DATE: 2007-3-2

The author draws an astonishing conclusion that the based on an improper report. I will discuss each of the mistakes in the argument one by one.

To begin with, more jobs have been created than have been eliminated only shows the absolute number of the jobs has increased, but cannot prove that these jobs have been occupied by those who lost their jobs. Entirely possible, these jobs are related with high technology, such as micro biology, software project and so forth. Usually the unemployed people lack basic skills which may be the reason that their companies would curtail them, how can we wish that they own those fashionable and practical skills demanded for those jobs? Therefore in that case the extra jobs are meaningless for those unemployed.

Even if those jobs are suitable for those unemployed, it still may not be enough in quantity. The groups of unemployed people have to face with the rivalry not only between other new labors, but also themselves, which prevents them from once more gaining a new job. Just as the author of the letter mentioned it is many of those who lost their jobs have found new employment, but not all of them, which may highly probably result from the insufficient new jobs and the competence. Failing to consider these factors, the author still cannot assert that the article in the newspaper is misleading.

Granted that flaws discussed above have all been modified, the author provide us information that the living standard of the unemployed people before they finding the new job. They simply have no source of income unless they have been hired again. During such time how can they afford the survival? The author even fails to show us how long do a common can find another job when he or she lost the former one in average. If the time is too long such as half of a year, it is hard to imagine that the living of the person, including the food, wearing, transportation and medical care. This is especially serious when the unemployed person is the main income source of a family. In that case, the whole family has to tolerate the hard life, just as the editor of the newspaper announced.

Given that those who lost jobs actually have found another job immediately, such facts may only existed in 1992, when the study was conducted. The situation nowadays may be far different or even opposite compared with the previous time. Maybe the policies have inclined to the newborn labors which inhibited the unemployment from gaining another job. Regardless of the different time, the author's assertion remains unsounded.

In summary, the author should cite a recent study rather than the one was conducted in 1992, and the content of the study should better support his opinion before he once more writes to the editor.