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."
YOUR RESPONSE:
The argument claims that the inflow of immigrant workers in local community is responsible for the decline in wages. Hence, imposition of moratorium on further immigration is required to protect the local economy. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, the argument readily assumes that the inflow of immigrant workers into local community has put a downward pressure on wages. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. For instance, a popular city, which is the home of major technological companies in world, has a fair number of immigrants. These immigrants are responsible for the creation of thousands of jobs in the city. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated how the flow of immigrants put downward pressure on wages in the local community.
Second, the argument claims that average compensation of unskilled labor declined by nearly 10% over the past 5 years. This again is a very weak and unsupported claim a the arguments does not demonstrate any correlation between decline in wages of unskilled labor and the flow of immigrants. If any such correlation had been shown, then the author would have sounded a bit more convincing.
Finally, the argument concludes that imposition of moratorium on further immigration is required to protect the local economy. From this statement again, it is not at all clear how the imposition of moratorium would help the local economy. Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claims is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could be considerably strenghtened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. In this particular case, the argument does not give information about the skill level of immigrants, the number of immigrants in proportion to local population and the duration since when the flow of immigrants has been taking place. Without this inforamtion, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
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."
YOUR RESPONSE:
The argument claims that the inflow of immigrant workers in local community is responsible for the decline in wages. Hence, imposition of moratorium on further immigration is required to protect the local economy. Stated in this way, the argument fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, the argument readily assumes that the inflow of immigrant workers into local community has put a downward pressure on wages. This statement is a stretch and not substantiated in any way. For instance, a popular city, which is the home of major technological companies in world, has a fair number of immigrants. These immigrants are responsible for the creation of thousands of jobs in the city. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly stated how the flow of immigrants put downward pressure on wages in the local community.
Second, the argument claims that average compensation of unskilled labor declined by nearly 10% over the past 5 years. This again is a very weak and unsupported claim a the arguments does not demonstrate any correlation between decline in wages of unskilled labor and the flow of immigrants. If any such correlation had been shown, then the author would have sounded a bit more convincing.
Finally, the argument concludes that imposition of moratorium on further immigration is required to protect the local economy. From this statement again, it is not at all clear how the imposition of moratorium would help the local economy. Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claims is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could be considerably strenghtened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. In this particular case, the argument does not give information about the skill level of immigrants, the number of immigrants in proportion to local population and the duration since when the flow of immigrants has been taking place. Without this inforamtion, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
