77.
In this editorial, the author argues that it makes financial sense for employers to make the workplace safer, in support of this claim the author reasons that since wages paid to employees should increase as the risk of physical injury increases, the converse should be true as well. Hence, by decreasing the risk of injury, employers could decrease the wages paid to workers and thereby save money. This argument is unconvincing for two reasons.
To begin with the author assumes that because companies would agree that as risk of injury increases wages should also increase, they would also agree that as risk decreases wages should also decrease accordingly. This is tantamount to the assumption that risk of injury is the primary factor that determines workers wages. It is obvious that few employers, and even fewer employees, would agree that this is the case. To adopt this position one would have to disregard education, experience, and skill as equally important factors in determining the wages paid to workers.
Secondly, the authors reasoning suggests that the only benefit of a safer workplace is the savings employers could realize from lower wages. This is obviously not true. The costs associated with accidents on the job could far outweigh any savings that could be realized by paying workers lower wages.
In conclusion, the authors argument is unconvincing. Risk of injury is an important factor to consider in determining the wages paid to workers but is not the only such factor. Furthermore, there are far better reasons for employers to make the workplace safe than the one presented by the author.
78.
This company memorandum suggests that, in lieu of adopting an official code of ethics, the company should conduct a publicity campaign that stresses the importance of promoting certain societal interests. The reason for the suggestion is that an official code of ethics might harm the company in the public eye because a competing company received unfavorablepublicity for violating its own ethics code. This argument is unconvincing, since it depends on several unwarranted assumptions as well as arguing against its own conclusion.
First of all, the author unfairly assumes that the two companies are sufficiently similar to ensure the same consequences of adopting an ethics code for this company as for its competitor. The competitor may have adopted an entirely different code from the one this company might adopt―perhaps with unrealistic standards not embraced by any other companies. Perhaps the competitors violation was extremely egregious, amounting to an aberration among businesses of its type; or perhaps one notorious executive is solely responsible for the competitors violation. Any of these scenarios, if true, would show that the two companies are dissimilar in ways relevant to the likelihood that this company will experience similar violations and similar publicity if it adopts any ethics code.
Secondly, the author unfairly assumes that the competitor was damaged by its code violation and the resulting publicity more than it would have been had it not violated its code. Just as likely, however, the violation was necessary to ensure a certain level of profitability or to protect other important interests. Without knowing the extent and nature of the damage resulting from the bad publicity or the reason for the violation, we cannot accept the authors conclusion.
Thirdly, the authors proposal is inconsistent with the authors conclusion about the consequences of adopting an ethics code. The author suggests that, instead of adopting an ethics code, this company should stress the importance of protecting the environment and assisting charitable organizations. This proposal is tantamount to adopting an ethics code. In this sense, the author suggests going against his own advice that the company should not adopt such a code.
in conclusion, differences between this company and its competitor may undermine the authors conclusion that this company should not adopt an ethics code. To better evaluate the argument, we need more information about the nature of the competitors ethics code and about the nature and extent of the violation. To strengthen the argument, the author must accord his advice with his conclusion that the company should not adopt an ethics code.
上一篇: GMAT考试:Issue写作范文二
体坛英语资讯:Kenyas Karoki puts title on the line at RAK Half Marathon in Dubai
中国企业家达沃斯吐金句 马云:如果贸易停止,世界就会停止
白宫公布移民改革框架
谋求提高声望,中国推动海上合作研究
国内英语资讯:China, Canada pledge to further boost economic ties
美国制裁六名塔利班和哈卡尼激进分子
国内英语资讯:Heavy snow wreaks havoc in east, central China
国际英语资讯:British PM to visit China
英语美文:不要瞧不起稳定的生活
国内英语资讯:Large U-shaped tunneling shield completes maiden excavation
国内英语资讯:US falls behind China in global leadership approval: survey
喀布尔发生汽车炸弹袭击,至少17人死亡
国内英语资讯:Chinas Xiamen Airlines to promote UN sustainable development message with new aircraft
一周热词榜(1.20-26)
国内英语资讯:Heavy snow causes havoc in parts of China
国际英语资讯:UN Security Council welcomes progress in Somalia
国内英语资讯:Chinas judicial agencies vow to be guardians of Constitution
小白鞋好看不耐穿,该怎么清洗才能亮白如新?
小白鞋好看不耐穿,该怎么清洗才能亮白如新?
报告显示 北京青少年的睡眠严重不足
体坛英语资讯:Leon Goretzkas move to Bayern causes consternation among Schalke fans
骆驼选美也造假!部分骆驼因整容被取消资格
面试时被问到“为什么想来这里工作?”这样回答最讨喜
体坛英语资讯:Viva China, Eredivisie champs Feyenoord launch nationwide youth training academy
Cloak and dagger?
体坛英语资讯:Kings Cup quarterfinal return legs promise thrills in Spain
国内英语资讯:Spotlight: A shared future, a shared view in Davos
国际英语资讯:Spotlight: Turkeys operation against Kurds in Syrias Afrin strains ties with U.S.
国际英语资讯:European UN envoys stress two-state solution to Palestinian issue
国内英语资讯:China needs high-quality, equal for all education: vice premier