argument143[Jet第八次作业]

huangli711UID: 2451421

*Downsizing is the process in which corporations deliberately reduce the number of their employees.
WORDS: 447          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2008-02-21 1:01:17
The letter to the editor claimed a recent article about downsizing in this national newspaper is misleading, in which the article gives an impression that many competent workers face serious economic hardship without a suitable employment. To illustrate his opinion, the writer assert a recent report on the United States economy, which found that the number of jobs created after 1992 is more than that have been eliminated. Also from the report the arguer conclude that many of unemployed have found new jobs, because two-thirds of the new jobs have been in industries to pay above-average wages, and most of those are full-time. Unfortunately, the writer fail to consider the total number of unemployed and the strike situation in the market, and conclude this point with a hast.

First, the arguer cannot prove many competent workers who lost jobs as a result of downsizing must find a new job sooner though it is true that since 1992 far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated. Without the information about the total number of new jobs, which supplied to unemployed, which include not only the competent workers by downsizing but also the fresh graduations, who also need jobs and with few requirement about the working condition or salary. So boss of course would give the opportunity to the less experience because less salary means more profit and the youths must be more active to one job, which might be his first full-time one. The left jobs to competent workers might be few. They might still face the hardship to finding job even though more jobs have been supplied in the competitive market.

Moreover,   this recent report from the arguer is a failure to support his conclusion, which is many of those who lost their jobs have found new employment, by a report that two-thirds of the newly created jobs have been in industries that tend to pay above-average wages, and much of jobs are full-time. Competent workers who lost jobs as a result of downsizing might be suitable to these newly created jobs, because they may be of much experience but lack of the particular knowledge, and they may be too old to be trained for a certain job. Besides, the vast of unemployment from downsizing may only happened in a majority of fields rather than the industry, so even more opportunities supplied in industries and tend to pay above-average wages, they still lose job by the limitation of knowledge.

In sum, the letter cannot convince me by its poor claiming. To strengthen his conclusion the writer should inform us the details about the unemployment market and the true situation many competent workers from the downsizing live.