ARGUMENT143 [REBORN FROM THE ASHES] TASK ONE by shenshen

shen_qiwenUID: 2594825

143. 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 fulltime.

1. The statistic is not significant: recent article& since 1992
2. Vague date: many, two-thirds
3. False analogy: suitable, for years

The arguer draws a conclusion that a recent article made by a national newspaper on corporate downsizing in the United States is misleading. The arguer demonstrates a recent report on the United States economy to support the conclusion, which presents that since 1992 far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated, and many people have found new employment again. Granted that the facts in this report are useful to explain some phenomenon, however, several critical fallacies in this argument should not be ignored.

First and foremost, the argument has a false analogy because the recent report on the United States economy lacks credibility. The statistic in the recent report on the United States economy is from 1992, which is the whole evaluation on the employment. The arguer fails to consider the difference between the recent employment condition and the several years’ condition. It has the possibility that there are millions of jobs have been created in the early years and now the number has been declined. However, it still ensures that the jobs which have been created are far more than been eliminated. Consequently, unless the arguer also takes this factor into consideration, the comparison is unconvincing.

In the second place, the information in the report is incomplete. At begin with, the article states that the people who lost their jobs are the competent workers, but the report just consider all the people who lost their jobs. Furthermore, there is no evidence provided that whether the new work is suitable for them and how long it takes for them to find the jobs. Even if a person who lost his job has found a new one, he may not be satisfied about it because the job is not in his major field; or the process of applying for the new jobs is too long that almost cost him several years. Thus, in the absence of all this information, it is unfair to accept the refutation made by the arguer.

In addition, the figures in the report are too imprecise, which cannot support the argument validly. The report simply concludes that many of those who lost their jobs have found new employment. Although this may be true that the people who lost their jobs can found the suitable jobs in a relative short time, the report, nevertheless, never tells us the exact date about the number of these people. For lack of the basic date information, the considerable doubt should be casted on the argument.


To sum up, the conclusion is not persuasive as the arguer standpoints. To strengthen the argument, the arguer must present more facts that what is the recent condition on competent workers’ employment. And to make it more logically acceptable, the arguer is supposed to provide more evidence that how people consider their new jobs and how long they cost in finding the new jobs. What is more, to better assess the argument it would be useful to use the precise date.