Evaluating and Engaging Wal-Mart Argument
He believes t is best for our economy. Malaria provides a much stronger argument than author Dan Levine. This assumption is supported by various rhetorical strategies. In contrast, Levine consistently commits fallacies. Author Dan Levine of "Wall-Mart's Big City Blues" argues against Wall-Mart because it does not abide by the Miming wage ordinance of Hartford, CT. The use of rhetorical strategies and fallacies In both essays will be evaluated to better determine if one author's argument Is more legitimate than the other. Mulligan's essay is well composed of legitimated claims with purported reasoning.
He expresses his thoughts very clearly along with the use of rhetorical strategies. Rhetorical strategies are tremendously useful when making claims or arguments. The first rhetorical strategy Malaria uses is citing experts. When he declares, "Wall-Mart has led a productivity revolution In re-tattling which supercharged the economy," Malaria emphasizes that Warren Buffet himself declares that Wall-Mart has contributed more than any other business to the health of the economy (688) to further help his argument that Wall-Mart has provided more bobs and cheaper way of living.
Citing experts is an effective way to convince someone because doing so provides the reader with insight that someone with experience agrees with the argument made. This creates logos which is a logic. Analogies are also valuable when arguing. This strategy helps the reader better understand a difficult topic by comparing It to, a more simple situation. Malaria references Wall- Mart as company that has been "pulverize" unionized grocery stores. Malaria also uses extended illustrations, providing examples, and anticipating arguments as a strategy.
Order custom essay Evaluating and Engaging Wal-Mart Argument with free plagiarism report
450+ experts on 30 subjects
Starting from 3 hours delivery
He demonstrates truth behind his claims by acknowledging that unions attempted to boycott the company as a "Merchant of Shame. " The boycott go no results, but the coalition has more effectively waged legislative battles around the country. In anti-Wall-Mart coalition has successfully lobbied more than a dozen cycles and towns to pass ordinances to keep Wall-Mart out, while dozens of other such bills are in the legislative hopper (Malaria 688). Although his essay includes a wide variety of strategies, it is not an example of a perfect essay.
He includes problematic sentences in his text also known as a fallacy. Fallacies are often identified to point-out flaws and weaknesses in one's argument. The fallacy that was most evident in his text would be considered to be card-stacking. Malaria displays card stacking by expressing how Los Angles Economic Development Council estimated that Wall-Mart would save Southern California shoppers $3. 76 billion annually and create up to 36,000 new Jobs. Just because this one study supports his claim, it does not mean this is true in every other state. Dan Levine commits many fallacies throughout his text.
He begins his first arcograph by asserting that "Wall-Mart is setting its sights on unfamiliar urban territory: a grassy lot in Hartford, Connecticut (685). " This fallacy is called scare tactics. This tactic is based around the ethical appeal which deals with morals (right from wrong. ) The second fallacy he commits is bandwagon. Levine bandwagon's activist by affirming that they have published a living-wage ordinance in 110 cities and country since the mid-sass. This fallacy focuses on the common saying majority rules. On the following page he references Jon Green who is a director of the Working Families Party in Connecticut.
Green asks "should Wall-Mart provide living- wage Jobs and [affordable] health benefits, or not? (686)" Green then says "that's a different kind of question than, 'should there be nothing, or should there be a massive retail development? Politically, we think that's a better wedge for us" (686). Levine is using Jon Green in his text to commit the testimonial fallacy. Authors use testimonials to sale themselves by citing experts in their text to Justify one to believing their claim. Olivine's essay is not completely compelled with fallacies though. He also incorporates useful rhetorical strategies.
The first strategy that was brought to attention was dividing and explaining. He explains how activist created a living-wage ordinance in 110 cities and countries. "Typically those laws require companies seeking city contracts, property tax abatements or other public subsidies to pay their employees a living wage, which can come to several dollars above hourly minimum-wage rates" (685). This strategy is extremely useful to incorporate in an essay. Broad topics can be misleading and hard to comprehend. Making steps or simplifying their evaluation helps the reader follow what he or she is trying to say.
Another strategy he uses is stats and facts. Levine declares that Wall-Marts static are remarkable and compares their annual sales to gross domestic product of Austria. Austria is a big rich European country, so to be compared to that specific country means a lot. Both Levine and Malaria displayed strengths and weaknesses throughout their essays. Malaria exhibited many rhetorical strategies along with a couple of fallacies while Steven Levine displayed the exact opposite. Aside from the rhetorical strengths that were used Malaria held a better argument.
Cite this Page
Evaluating and Engaging Wal-Mart Argument. (2017, Nov 02). Retrieved from https://phdessay.com/evaluating-and-engaging-wal-mart-argument/
Run a free check or have your essay done for you
