Argument 143【dies in flames 0910G长线突破组】 task by yuyu7yaya

yuyu7yayaUID: 2461700

人生就是在不停的赶场子……


Since more jobs have been offered，more unemployed men found new work, and parallel salaries have been payed for full-time jobs, the letter points out that the claim - many competent workers who lost jobs as a result of downsizing face serious economic hardship, often for years, before finding other suitable employment- is not so reasonable. I appreciate the golden Skeptical attitude of this writer，while question the effectiveness of his argument.

To begin with, despite of more employment since 1992,I still wonder whether the chances competent workers facing have been enriched as well? After the supply-demand relation of employment keeps changing from on year to another, And therefore, there may be more job hunters rushing in as the conterpoint of increasing employments, for instance, the alien immigrants with crying need for feeding, the new workers with burning desire to prove themselves. It is truth that, when comparing with competent workers lack of experince and ability weakens newcomers strength, however, to some extent they still maintain competitive with lower employment cost. In other words, even the number of work offers is increasing since1992, it is still possible that more competition and fewer chances the competent workers have to face for job hunting.

If we take the fact that new jobs are brought quickly to competent workers into account, I remain unconviced on these people’s free from economic hardship. Maybe for them, average wages don’t necessarily mean adequate. Because Many have to feed their family, maintain the car, pay taxes and afford their children’s tution. These burdens are, surely, too many for one man to bear without fat salary. Under this situation, an comfortable life seems much away far from accomplished. What’ more, their new jobs, to some degree, maight be not so suitable. The writer mentioned in his letter that two third of the recently created jobs comes for industries, but what kind of work, physical or mental ones? We should notice that more jobs offered doesn’t equal more dream jobs offered: for competent electronic engineers, oilman is definitly not a good choice, and it is also challenging for an experinced cotton spinner to writes copies for the advertising company. Even they could change their profession in a very short time, the content, interpersonal relationship and working coditions of the new job are probably too hard for them to stand. And hence, Their new jobs look like a battle that has to be faced rather than an adventure that could let them relax and enjoy.

What's more, the survey cited by the writer as evidence only offers statistics of full-time jobs, nothing about part-time jobs has been mentioned at the same time. For this, I would like to regard the investigation not so appropriate for the writer’s argument. After all, part-time work, as important as full-time ones, aids people a lot to lighten economic burden and release working stress. There is no doubt that, the income of one man who lost his part-time job must be lower, sometimes much lower than before. Therefore, it’s significance should be neglated when the controversy of employment is conducted. I’m afraid if the writer want to perfect his talking points, the statistic of part-time job is necessary.

All in all, although the writer refers toUnited States economy’s report for his letter, his use and analysis of those statistics seems not so logical and reasonable. And if he insists on this veiwpoint, More detailed information such as the number of job hunters, the kind of new jobs and the situation of part-time jobs, should be provided.