Essay ch 8
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Harrisburg Area Community College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
057
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by oliviaolean
Olivia Spahr
Gainor
Philosophy 102
6th November 2023
The author, John Sumansky, argues that outsourcing is not a job killer but a job
creator in the U.S. He criticizes politicians who use the term "outsourcing" as a synonym
for sending jobs overseas and label it as un-American. He uses Donald Trump's
statement about imposing a 25% tax on imports from China as an example of a
misguided view on outsourcing. Misleading Vividness: The author uses the example of
Donald Trump's proposed tax on Chinese imports to argue against all forms of
protectionism, which is a misleading argument. One policy proposal does not represent
all forms of protectionism. Also Appeal to Ridicule: The author uses the banana example
to ridicule the idea that outsourcing can lead to job losses, which is a fallacious
argument.
Sumansky explains that outsourcing is a business strategy used by companies to
obtain resources and raw materials at the lowest possible cost. This allows U.S.
businesses to offer their products at competitive prices in global markets. He argues
that taxing Chinese imports would raise production costs in the U.S., making firms less
competitive and jeopardizing American jobs.
He also points out that the proposed tax hike would be passed on to consumers,
leading to higher prices and a slowdown in U.S. business and job growth. He uses the
2
example of outsourcing bananas to highlight the absurdity of the argument against
outsourcing. False Equivalence: The author compares outsourcing manufacturing jobs
to outsourcing banana production, which is a false equivalence. The two are not the
same, as the U.S. does not have the climate to grow bananas on a large scale, while it
does have the capacity to manufacture goods. Ignoring Counter-Evidence: The author
dismisses the idea that jobs are lost due to outsourcing, stating there's no real data on
jobs lost. However, there are numerous studies and data that suggest otherwise.
Sumansky challenges the claim that outsourcing leads to job losses, stating that
there's no real data to support this. He explains that a job in China or Vietnam is not
equivalent to a job in New York due to productivity differences. He suggests that the
number of jobs lost to outsourcing is likely overstated. Hasty Generalization: The author
generalizes that outsourcing is a job creator without providing substantial evidence. The
argument is based on the assumption that lower costs for businesses will lead to job
creation, but this is not always the case.
False Cause: The author suggests that taxing
imports would lead to job losses, but this is a complex issue with many contributing
factors. The argument assumes a direct cause-and-effect relationship where one may
not exist.
He concludes by stating that outsourcing has been a global practice since
commerce began and that 13 out of every 100 jobs in the U.S. exist because the rest of
the world outsources to America. He implies that outsourcing contributes to the U.S.
Gross Domestic Product being 13% larger than it would be otherwise.
Oversimplification: The author simplifies the complex issue of outsourcing by focusing
only on cost savings for businesses and not considering other factors such as wage
3
differences, working conditions, and the impact on local economies. Cherry Picking: The
author selectively uses information that supports his argument (e.g., the 13% GDP
increase due to foreign outsourcing to America) while ignoring information that might
contradict it.
In evaluating the essay, Sumansky presents a cogent argument. He effectively
uses examples and logical reasoning to challenge the common perception of
outsourcing. However, his argument could be strengthened by providing more concrete
data and evidence to support his claims. His assertion that there's no real data on jobs
lost due to outsourcing could be seen as a weak point in his argument, as it could be
interpreted as a lack of research or evidence.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help