ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper:
"The inflow of immigrant workers into our community has put a downward pressure on wages. In fact, the average compensation of unskilled labor in our city has declined by nearly 10% over the past 5 years. Therefore, to protect our local economy, it is essential to impose a moratorium on further immigration."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
MY RESPONSE:
The author argues that the inflow of immigrant workers has lead to a drop in wages for unskilled workers. He is therefore suggesting a ban on further immigration to help the economy pick up and therefore increase local wages. In a relatively stagnant economy an excess supply of unskilled immigrant workers could well drive down unskilled labour costs this considers two assumptions. Firstly that the economy is either stagnant or growing slowly and not shrinking and also that the immigrants are all unskilled.
While we are aware that the average compensation for unskilled labour has declined by nearly 10% in the last 5 years the author gives us no indication about the state of the economy in these 5 years. An economy that was shrinking would result in a declining compensation package irrespective of immigration and not because of it. If the author were to give us some indication that the local economy and other wage rates were either on the upswing or stagnant it would establish a better cause-effect relationship between immigration and the downward spiral in payscales.
Additionally the author indicated that a moratorium on further immigration would be the solution to protecting the local economy and increasing worker salary. Skilled and semi-skilled immigrant workers however are very important to growing an economy whether local or otherwise. Immigrant workers often fill existing gaps in labor supply and help the economy and community to grow thereby increasing both jobs and wages. A ban on immigrants may therefore work against rather than towards protecting the economy.
This argument is not well reasoned due to two major flaws in its logic. Though the argument holds some merit but is inconclusive without further evidence on the state of the local economy and labor market.
The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper:
"The inflow of immigrant workers into our community has put a downward pressure on wages. In fact, the average compensation of unskilled labor in our city has declined by nearly 10% over the past 5 years. Therefore, to protect our local economy, it is essential to impose a moratorium on further immigration."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
MY RESPONSE:
The author argues that the inflow of immigrant workers has lead to a drop in wages for unskilled workers. He is therefore suggesting a ban on further immigration to help the economy pick up and therefore increase local wages. In a relatively stagnant economy an excess supply of unskilled immigrant workers could well drive down unskilled labour costs this considers two assumptions. Firstly that the economy is either stagnant or growing slowly and not shrinking and also that the immigrants are all unskilled.
While we are aware that the average compensation for unskilled labour has declined by nearly 10% in the last 5 years the author gives us no indication about the state of the economy in these 5 years. An economy that was shrinking would result in a declining compensation package irrespective of immigration and not because of it. If the author were to give us some indication that the local economy and other wage rates were either on the upswing or stagnant it would establish a better cause-effect relationship between immigration and the downward spiral in payscales.
Additionally the author indicated that a moratorium on further immigration would be the solution to protecting the local economy and increasing worker salary. Skilled and semi-skilled immigrant workers however are very important to growing an economy whether local or otherwise. Immigrant workers often fill existing gaps in labor supply and help the economy and community to grow thereby increasing both jobs and wages. A ban on immigrants may therefore work against rather than towards protecting the economy.
This argument is not well reasoned due to two major flaws in its logic. Though the argument holds some merit but is inconclusive without further evidence on the state of the local economy and labor market.
