argu143 FLY AW小组第三十三次作业

xmbjowlUID: 2182375

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: 468          TIME: 上午 12:25:55          DATE: 2006-7-9

In this letter, the arguer asserts that the recent article, featured by the editor of a national newspaper on corporate downsizing in the United States is misleading. To support the assertion, the letter refers to a recent report on the United Stated economy, in an attempt to deny the impression that many competent workers' unemployment should be ascribed to the downsizing face serious economics hardship. Unforetunately, the cited results of the report are not convincing enough to negate the editor's recent article.

In the first place, the report is not statistically reliable, for several following reasons. First, the credibility as well as the representative of the report is open to doubt. Are the data and analyzing schemes involving in the report good enough to create correct conclusions? Could the results drawn from the data be representative of the overall group of workers nationwide? Also, the vague data cited in the report should be carefully examined. The report just provide that many of the employees who lost jobs have found new employment, yet the detailed proportion of the mentioned group to the whole group of individuals who have found jobs  is not clear. Maybe the actual level of the obtaining the employment again is low, compared to the average level in the job market.

Besides, even assuming the results from the cited report are sound enough, the evidence mentioned in the argument can lend little credence to the arguer’s contention. Firsly, no evidence is provided that the newly-created jobs would be suitable for the workers who lost their orignal jobs. Perhaps those unemployed are labors for mechanical jobs, while the newly-created ones are involved with high technology, such as computer engineering and biochemical research. Or perhaps the job market becomes increasingly competitive, due to a great amount of graduates instilled into the limited market. If so, the situation of employment can only be worse, rather than being ameliorated.

Also, even assuming that the amount of reemployment is positive, no evidence is provided that the high-salary job is available for the job seekers. Again, perhaps the jobs require experience, knowledge of various fields and proficiently mastering of management. All the above requirements seems too challenging for an average technician to be qualified. Due to being unable to be competent for these jobs, the so-called high-salary ones could only be unaccessible to the ordinary workers in the short run.

In concludion, despite the uncertain credibility and representative of the cited report, the reasons deduced from this report are convincing by no means to be accepted. In order to strengthen the assertion, more detailed information would be required, regarding the concrete requirement of the newly-created jobs as well as the high-salary jobs. In addition, the relevant data in the job market should be provided for bolstering the positive condition of the reemployment.