argument143 [加州阳光]第二次作业

lixiaomin046400UID: 2207959

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: 507
        
The editorial argues against the article's assertion that many competent workers who lost jobs have faced serious economic hardship for they are difficult in finding suitable employment. To justify its disagreement the editorial cites a recent report, which points out far more jobs have been created since 1992, and many workers who lost jobs have found new jobs, and most newly created jobs are full-time positions in industries that tend to pay above-average wages. For three reasons, this editorial lends little credibility to refute the article's assertion.

First, far more jobs do not necessarily indicate that the unemployed men can find suitable employment. The editorial fails to provide specific data such as the number of increasing jobs, the number of eliminated jobs as well as the number of job seekers. Perhaps not only the workers who have lost jobs but also the graduates are finding jobs, the increase in the number of new jobs is insufficient for the increasing job seekers. In addition, more jobs might not be suitable for able workers. Perhaps most jobs involve serving, cleaning and maintenance, which require a low level of skill and experience. However, most downsized job seekers are highly educated so that they want to look for the same type of work as their former jobs. In short, unless the editorial provides detailed information about the newly created jobs, the editorial's author cannot convincingly refute the article's assertion.

Secondly, the editorial's claim relies on the fact that many downsized job seekers have found new employment. Yet on the one hand, lacking evidence the term 'many' is too vague to draw any confirmed conclusion. It is entirely possible that the number of able workers who have found jobs are rather a small group comparing to the overall downsized job seekers. On the other hand, perhaps these competent workers have spent several years on finding their jobs, and it may not be the suitable jobs for them. Thus, without more information about those who lost their jobs have found new employment, it is impossible to assess that the article gives the mistaken impression.

Thirdly, the editorial overlooks the possibility that even if two-thirds of newly created jobs in industries are full-time and above-average paid, there might be not suitable for downsized employees. Perhaps most downsized employees were high-paying ones before they downsized by the corporations. The above-average cannot regain their former economic status, no matter the newly positions are full-time. Thus, it may be easy for them to find a job, whereas it is difficult for them to find jobs that are like their former ones. Without accounting for this scenario, the editorial cannot draw any conclusion based on that questionable report.

In sum, the editorial is ill-founded. To strengthen it the editorial must provide clear evidence that the increasing jobs are enough for both the downsized employees and the graduates, and the newly jobs are suitable for them. To more effectively refute the article's assertion, the editorial should give me more information about the downsized employees who have found jobs.