Free article review on yes

– What is the writer’s claim or thesis? Ask yourself:
The writer claims that the people are poor because the government has a hand in it. In this article, Cove is surprised that though people are blind folded that there is a fight against poverty in the society, almost all the activists and other interested groups rejoice and benefit from the expanding number of the people who receive public assistance.
2. What claim is being asserted?
Cove says that only work will do away with poverty. He says that work expands an individual’s capacity to economic self reliance. It creates a sense of individual responsibility and also socializes people. It helps connect the behavior of a person and consequences thus allow people to get respect and admiration.
3. What assumptions are being made- and are they acceptable?
Cove assumes that it is possible for everybody in a country to work. This cannot be true however idealistic we would want to be.
He also assumes that the chief role of the government is to create job opportunities to its citizen. The government is entitled with other responsibilities that are more crucial that job creation. Furthermore, the government has several departments and it would not be prudent to blame all the government officials on increased poverty.
Cove also assumes that there is a serious rift between the government and its citizens. This can be seen from his one-sided argument that blames the government all through. He does not appreciate that the government delivers its services to the common man through other people. In addition to this, he does not recognize the role that the public play in ensuring success or failure of the government policies.
There is also assumption of the meaning of work. Cove does not clearly define what work is. For instance, he assumes that being employed by a company or government is the ultimate job. What of people who are self employed? What of farmers who are fully engrossed in their farms?
These assumptions made by Cove are very subjective and it would be wrong to permit them into crucifying the government on the collective responsibility of the all citizens. Secondly, it would be unfair using a failure of government to water down everything that could be taking place.
4. Are important terms satisfactorily defined?
Cove’s explanation is a bit general and doesn’t settle on specific issues. For instance, he says that people are poor, what parameters does he use to arrive at this? He does not put it clear what he means by giving people jobs? Can you create jobs and give to people as long as they are citizen of your country? Cove does not dispense fully the meaning of giving people jobs.
His understanding of government is also questionable. How possible can a government help afew people at the expense of the majority? Any good government will try to minimize the unemployment that that is what is taking place. 5. What support (evidence) is offered on behalf of the claim? Ask yourself:
He claims that the government policies have terribly failed. Cove says that several government policies to fight poverty have not been fruitful despite the unparalleled expenditures. He claims that things worsened thus increasing the dependency of the people on hand-outs. Governments ended up signing more expensive welfare programs e. g. National Welfare Rights Organization which was flooded with new clients and full of restrictive eligibility criteria thus not being effective. According to me, all that the government does is to the benefit of the people. More strict rules just ensure right people get the jobs!
6. Are there examples relevant, and are they convincing?
When he was working through America Works, which was his pilot welfare program, Cove says that it was possible to give people jobs thus tremendously improving their lives and consequently reducing dependency ration. Through his successes of giving people jobs, cove influenced federal welfare reforms around 1990s. He does not tell us the role that technology play, the role that education play and the role that the people play in getting these jobs. He gives credit to his company leaving several issues at stake.
7. Are the statistics ( if any) relevant, accurate, and complete? Do they allow only the interpretation that is offered in the argument?
Yes. 9. Is the logic- deductive and inductive-valid?
The deductive reasoning in Cove’s article is not valid. There are several unexplained issues and unanswered questions that would not allow us to generalize his opinion.
It is true that the government has failed to draw its citizens from poverty. I support this inductive reasoning.
10. If there is an appeal to emotion for instance, if satire is used to ridicule the opposing view- is this appeal acceptable?

11. Does the writer seem to you to be fair? Ask yourself:
The writer is not fair. This is due to his subjective assumptions.
12. Are counterarguments adequately considered?
No. he is writing from his own perspective not factoring in what other people could have in mind.
13. Is there any evidence of dishonesty or of a discreditable attempt to manipulate the reader?
No. he tries his best to give a personal account and perspective on reduction of poverty.
14. How does the writer establish the image of himself or herself that we sense in the essay? What is the writer’s tone, and is it appropriate?
The writer portrays himself to be caring and means good to the common citizen. However, he is angered by the happenings in the government. He is also not happy with some of the government policies.

Reference:

http://www. city-journal. org/2012/22_4_poverty. html