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.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The editor claims that the inflow of immigrant workers is causing decline in compensation of unskilled labor and thus a moratorium is required to protect local economy. Presented in this way, the argument fails to consider many key factors and relies on several assumptions that are difficult to ascertain. The argument is flawed, unconvincing and weak.
To start with, the author states that the 10% decline in the average compensation in past 5 years is due to influx of immigrant workers. Though, this can be one of the many reasons, it can not be inferred that it is the actual cause. There are possibilities that the economy has slowed down in past 5 years or the unskilled work is now mechanized, causing demand of unskilled labor to drop. The author has failed to take such key factors into account. The argument would have been much clearer and stronger, if the the author has made an effort to justify his statement.
Secondly, the author simply assumes that the decline in average compensation requires that local economy has to be protected, not stating clear relationship between the two. As discussed already, the unskilled and semi-skilled work in the economy may have mechanized and thus, though wages are dropping but economy may still be doing good It should have provided more evidence in order to evaluate the argument thoroughly.
Lastly, another linkage between protecting local economy and imposing moratorium on further immigration is not clear and requires clear analysis. Probably, on imposing such restriction, a slowing local economy can get further deteriorated.
Thus the argument is seriously flawed and thoroughly unimpressive. A detailed analysis and substantial statistics are required to evaluate the tall claims the argument makes.
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.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The editor claims that the inflow of immigrant workers is causing decline in compensation of unskilled labor and thus a moratorium is required to protect local economy. Presented in this way, the argument fails to consider many key factors and relies on several assumptions that are difficult to ascertain. The argument is flawed, unconvincing and weak.
To start with, the author states that the 10% decline in the average compensation in past 5 years is due to influx of immigrant workers. Though, this can be one of the many reasons, it can not be inferred that it is the actual cause. There are possibilities that the economy has slowed down in past 5 years or the unskilled work is now mechanized, causing demand of unskilled labor to drop. The author has failed to take such key factors into account. The argument would have been much clearer and stronger, if the the author has made an effort to justify his statement.
Secondly, the author simply assumes that the decline in average compensation requires that local economy has to be protected, not stating clear relationship between the two. As discussed already, the unskilled and semi-skilled work in the economy may have mechanized and thus, though wages are dropping but economy may still be doing good It should have provided more evidence in order to evaluate the argument thoroughly.
Lastly, another linkage between protecting local economy and imposing moratorium on further immigration is not clear and requires clear analysis. Probably, on imposing such restriction, a slowing local economy can get further deteriorated.
Thus the argument is seriously flawed and thoroughly unimpressive. A detailed analysis and substantial statistics are required to evaluate the tall claims the argument makes.
