Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
r4nta
Joined: 20 Oct 2015
Last visit: 07 Jun 2017
Posts: 7
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 13
Schools: IESE '18 (M$) ESADE '18 (A)
GMAT 1: 640 Q38 V39
20 Nov 2015, 07:07
Kudos
Bookmarks
Please kindly evaluate the following essay and provide feedback. Thank you!
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.
RESPONSE:
The presented argument is flawed based on numerous reasons. The article fails to provide evidence for the assumption, that a 10% decline in unskilled labor compensation is caused by the inflow of immigrant workers into the country. This assumption has no ground, keeping in mind that there can be various other reasons for such a decline in simple work wages.
First of all, the argument does not present valid numbers or any source where it bases the findings on. Without specifying how many immigrants related to the local laborers are actually coming into the community, there is no way to assess the impact. It would make a huge difference if there were an additional 80% of the current populaion immigrating or only 1% that would never cause a measurable effect. The argument would present itself much stronger if it would deal with proofed numbers and ratios.
Secondly, the argument bases its demand of a moratorium on further immigration solely on the assumption that the lower pay is caused by immigrant workers who work for less money. This is wrong, because wages can vary a lot in the course of economic phases of a country. If there was a stable economy 5 years ago and a recession today, that would be a good explanation of why the labor market would be in a poor shape. A poor economy would result in the lowering of average compensation and therefore serve as a different explanation for the current situation.
Lastly, a 10% drop of the average wages can be caused by other things. For instance there could have been recent changes of what is actually classified as unskilled labor. If 5 years ago the range for the classification as unskilled labor was bigger and therefore more workers with higher wages were taken into consideration, the average would have been higher. If this was the issue, then it would serve as explanation of why the average wage today is lower, even without any changes in payment in the lower ranks of unskilled labor.
All these identified flaws show, that the argument in itself is a flawed argument that cannot hold up its premise-assumption-argument chain. It would be much stronger if it would have adressed the above mentioned points.
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.
RESPONSE:
The presented argument is flawed based on numerous reasons. The article fails to provide evidence for the assumption, that a 10% decline in unskilled labor compensation is caused by the inflow of immigrant workers into the country. This assumption has no ground, keeping in mind that there can be various other reasons for such a decline in simple work wages.
First of all, the argument does not present valid numbers or any source where it bases the findings on. Without specifying how many immigrants related to the local laborers are actually coming into the community, there is no way to assess the impact. It would make a huge difference if there were an additional 80% of the current populaion immigrating or only 1% that would never cause a measurable effect. The argument would present itself much stronger if it would deal with proofed numbers and ratios.
Secondly, the argument bases its demand of a moratorium on further immigration solely on the assumption that the lower pay is caused by immigrant workers who work for less money. This is wrong, because wages can vary a lot in the course of economic phases of a country. If there was a stable economy 5 years ago and a recession today, that would be a good explanation of why the labor market would be in a poor shape. A poor economy would result in the lowering of average compensation and therefore serve as a different explanation for the current situation.
Lastly, a 10% drop of the average wages can be caused by other things. For instance there could have been recent changes of what is actually classified as unskilled labor. If 5 years ago the range for the classification as unskilled labor was bigger and therefore more workers with higher wages were taken into consideration, the average would have been higher. If this was the issue, then it would serve as explanation of why the average wage today is lower, even without any changes in payment in the lower ranks of unskilled labor.
All these identified flaws show, that the argument in itself is a flawed argument that cannot hold up its premise-assumption-argument chain. It would be much stronger if it would have adressed the above mentioned points.
Moderators:
188 posts
