The discussion in this week’s class turned to proposals. Proposals define a problem and its causes, present a step-by-step plan to address it, and convince the audience that the devised plan is the best solution. An article that used these elements effectively is James Kwak’s open letter to President Obama about the looming debate over whether or not to extending the “Bush Tax Cuts.” He starts by defining the expiring tax cut policy as benefiting the rich over the middle class and emphasizes its effects, even pleading with the President in his introduction.
To further his argument, he analyzed the problem, citing how the top quintile of the population will receive over 65% of the benefit from the policy. He also weighed the policy’s effects on economic growth and the federal deficit. He then linked the deficit problem to the government’s perception on how to deal with Social Security and Medicare. Kwak laid out a detailed plan (in the form of a speech) for the president to take a position against extending the policy, and an explanation of how it actually benefits the middle class.
Kwak does an analysis of the costs and benefits of letting the tax cuts sunset, conceding that the middle class would lose an estimated $880 in returns. However, the plan would also create an estimated $3.7 trillion reduction in projected national debt. In addition, it would cripple the argument to make substantial cuts to Medicare and Social Security, which overwhelmingly help the middle class over the wealthy. The presidential speech example serves as the conclusion of the proposal. The closing argument looks to the future and takes a decisive tone to protect the social safety net, as well as tackle the country’s deficit and disparity problems now instead of forcing the coming generations to pay for them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-kwak/obama-bush-tax-cuts-compromise-_b_783356.html
No comments:
Post a Comment