The Case for Greatly Increased Immigration Vrs Timeout

3 Pages 808 Words

Contrasing Two Essays
In the argumentative essay “The Case for Greatly Increased Immigration” written by Julian L. Stein and also the essay “Timeout” written by Dan Stein, they are both trying to convince the audience to take their side. Stein and Simon both have different views on the subject of immigration, Simon wants the immigration rate to be increased and on the other hand, Stein wants to stop it all together until the issues are under control. Not only does Simon have evidence to justify his facts, but he also uses a number of reasons and explanations. Although Stein has some strong points, he seems to use his facts in negative ways. Simon’s essay seems to be more effective in persuading the audience to increase immigration.
A strong point that makes Simon’s essay more effective than Stein’s, is that almost every one of his statements and facts are backed up by some sort of evidence. In both of the essays they talk about the number of immigrants that arrived in the U.S. in 1991. Simon said that there were about 600,00 to 750,000 admitted in that year (457). Simon also states where he got these numbers. On the other hand, in Stein’s essay he claims there were over 1,800,000 immigrants admitted to the U.S. in 1991(469). Not only was that number more than two times the number Simon gave, but also Stein does not even explain where or how he got the numbers, which makes his facts less effective.
Another point, that would make Simon’s essay more effective would be the statements that he makes in letting the audience know of the ways the natives can benefit by admitting a certain number of immigrants in. Not only is he just stating the reasons, he is explaining them in detail and using examples to make them more convincing to the reader. One statement Simon’ makes is that immigration would actually save the native money:
The tax and welfare data together indicate that, on balance, an immigrant famil...