Please rate my essays

Putting up 2 recently written essays. Please give feedback. Thanks.

Analysis of Argument

"Americans spend far too much of their time buying and consuming non-essential goods. Studies show that, on average Americans spend over a quarter of their leisure time shopping. As such, it is no secret why America is losing its competitive edge relative to other countries. Instead of spending their time productively, Americans are wasting time through frivolous consumption. In order to counteract this trend, Americans should spend more time focused on personal and communal development--by, for example, pursuing educational advancement or participating in volunteer opportunities."

My response:

The argument made by the author states that since Americans are spending too much time on consumption, they are losing their competitive edge. The author goes on to claim that this time can be better utilized if it were to be spent on activities which are focused on personal and communal development.

However the logic of this argument has many flaws. Firstly, the argument mentions that Americans spend a quarter of their leisure time on shopping which is unproductive. But this raises a subjective question of how much is too much? Moreover, the author assumes that the remaining three quarters of leisure time is also being spent unproductively. Maybe that time is being spent on the very activities which the author suggests. The author has provided insufficient evidence to back his claim here.

Secondly the argument mentions that Americans are wasting time because of frivolous consumption. But the author fails to see that it is consumption which leads to a rise in demand of goods and services, thus stimulating production and creating jobs for people both which are good for the economy. An activity which results in many positives can surely not be a waste of time as is argued by the author.

Thirdly the author mentions a set of alternative activities that, according to him, will result in a better utilization of time for Americans and ultimately help them regain their competitive edge. However he fails to mention any supporting studies which show that such activities will lead to the desired effects.

It can also be argued that shopping is a form of relaxation which leads to a better utilization of the non-leisure time and better productivity. If this is the case then clearly shopping would lead to Americans gaining a competitive edge. To make a more convincing case for his argument the author should provide data from studies which can show that high time spent on consumption leads to low competitive edge

Analysis of an Issue

"Nuclear weapons are potentially more devastating than any other weapon in human history. We must stop pointing the nuclear gun at our own heads. The best way to lower the threat of nuclear war is for the nuclear capable nations, including the U.S., to lead by example and dismantle their own nuclear arsenals."

My response:
The statement made is, "Nuclear weapons are potentially more devastating than any other weapon in human history. We must stop pointing the nuclear gun at our own heads. The best way to lower the threat of nuclear war is for the nuclear capable nations, including the U.S., to lead by example and dismantle their own nuclear arsenals."

While completely agreeing on the devastating nature of nuclear weapons, I disagree with the statement that dismantling nuclear weapons is the best way to lower the threat of a nuclear war. The statement can be considered, at best, as an idealistic solution though an impractical one.

I do not believe it is practically possible to lower threat of a nuclear war just by dismantling nuclear weapons. The technology and know-how required to make these weapons of mass destruction are available to both the covert and overt nuclear capable countries and these weapons can be made in a relatively short period of time. Dismantling current nuclear weapons does not guarantee that such weapons would not be made in future.

For example, a few years back it was reported that A.Q. Khan, the chief scientist of Pakistan's nuclear program, had secretly sold the technology to North Korea. As per status quo, North Korea is not considered as a friendly state by many western countries. It is doubtful that North Korea would relinquish their weapons seeing examples of other countries. Unless all the nuclear weapons in the world are dismantled simultaneously, backed by a safeguard which does not allow nations to make them again, the above proposal would result in opposite of the desired effect.

Consider a situation where many responsible nuclear nations, such as the United States, have dismantled their nuclear weapons while many unstable nations, such as Iran or North Korea, posses them. With no threat of an equal or greater retaliation, the threat of a nuclear attack is actually higher. To be more effective the proposed solution needs to simultaneously make sure that all the nuclear capable countries in the world dismantle their weapons and never make them

This topic has expert replies