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.”
My Response:The argument claims that the inflow of immigrant workers into the community has put a downward pressure on wages and is affecting the economy in negative manner. Stated in this way, the argument manipulates facts and shows a distorted view of reality. It also fails to mention key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated. The conclusion relies on assumptions and does not provide clear evidence. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, the argument states that the inflow of immigration workers into the community has put a downward pressure on wages. This statement is a stretch as it does not other factors into consideration. While, inflow of workers could be a prominent reason but it fails to mention other reasons as well. For example, the need for workers might have reduced as some projects have been completed in those five years or the work present requires less skilled laborers and thus the reduction in wages. Clearly, the argument fails to foresee all these reasons for the decline. If the argument states that the only reason for decline is immigration with proper evidence then it could have been more convincing.
Second, the argument claims in order to protect local economy, it is essential to impose a moratorium on further immigration. The argument is weak and unsupported as it fails to demonstrate any correlation between local economy and immigrants. While, there is also a possibility that immigrants are working to flourish the economy of the region. As the industries can find skilled and unskilled workers for comparatively less costs and in turn, make more profits. The argument could have been much clearer had it presented some evidence to establish relation between local economy and immigrants.
Finally, the argument also talks about the decrease in average compensation of unskilled labor in the city. But has the average declined for the local labors? Is the payment of wages skewed? Also, another important question: were there enough workers 5 years ago? Without convincing answers to these questions, the argument seems to be based on wishful thinking rather than on substantive evidence.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and therefore is unconvincing. It could be considerably be strengthened had the author mentioned all the relevant facts. In order to assess a particular situation, complete knowledge or information about it is required. Without this knowledge or information, the argument remains weak and open to debate.