Description
Hi,
Below I will be attaching my writing piece. I will attach the rough draft before edits and the rough draft with some edits but please go in and make it better regarding the prompt and the peer review feedback (3 people peer reviewed mine). I will include the rubric, other information needed, and the peer review comments. Please make a final writing assignment of what the prompt and revisions are asking for ready to be turned in.
SOME FEEDBACK:
– define (non)binding, price floor – relationship between automation & labor? – how does the new minimum wage affect the curves in the automation, labor, and final goods markets? make sure to mention this both for the new minimum wage and the ban sections – welfare analysis for both sections – paraphrase w/ in-text citations
Here’s where your paper stands on the rubric:
– Concepts & Accuracy: Missing
– Linking Concepts: Missing
– Conciseness: Meets
– Interpreting Sources: Meets
– Analysis of Case Study: Meets/Missing
– Response Alignment with Audience: Meets
Below is the entire writing assignment description:
Writing Assignment 2: Government Intervention
THE SITUATION
In San Francisco, the fear of losing jobs to automation after an increase to the minimum wage has motivated two similar policy proposals aimed at discouraging or banning automation. As a student of economics and someone who will soon enter the job market, you find this issue interesting and relevant. [For simplicity, assume these policies are only occurring in or are only proposed for the San Francisco area. Also assume the ban is for automation in general, not just delivery robots.]
THE PROMPT
Write a letter to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors regarding the two policy proposals under consideration: a tax on automation (Ms. Kim’s proposal) or a ban on automation (Mr. Yee’s proposal). Your letter should:
Briefly explain the economic impact of a minimum wage increase (moving from nonbinding to binding) in the labor market, and its extended effect on the automation market as well as the market for a good which may be produced using labor, automation or some combination of the two;
Identify one of the two proposed policies and construct an argument, based in the economics you’ve learned in class, for why you oppose the policy.
You, personally, may oppose both policy proposals, but your paper should focus on only one policy, given the word count limit.
Your argument of opposition should not be based in your support for the other proposed policy.
While your letter is a normative economic assessment, majority of the letter should consist of positive economic analysis. [While you may have strong opinions on this subject based in moral or ethical reasoning, the purpose of this assignment is to see your ability to use the economic tools you’ve learned to analyze the situation.]
Explain the economic impact of this policy proposal on these same markets, highlighting the economic reasoning for opposing the policy;
Start your analysis assuming the minimum wage increase already occurred.
Be persuasive.
Items to keep in mind:
The Board of Supervisors likely has some knowledge of economics. Your explanations may assume prior general knowledge consistent with our coverage of Supply, Demand, Consumer Surplus, Producer Surplus, and Efficiency (Chapters 3, and 4). The supervisors understand the definitions of these terms, but not necessarily how they interact specifically to this problem. For example, the Board of Supervisors do not immediately understand how a price change in the labor market affects related markets.
The provided article must be cited. External references are not required but also must be cited, if used. Either APA format or MLA format are acceptable.
Since you are writing to the Board of Supervisors, you should take care to carefully edit and proofread your letter.
Your letter should be between 400-500 words (this includes your first draft) and should follow the conventions of a professional letter, including a To and From section as well as a professional and courteous tone. Please sign your letter “A Concerned Citizen” since anonymity is needed for peer review. Please include a word count at the end of your assignment. [The word count may exclude the “To” and “From” lines, as well as the parenthetical citations within your paper. Note quotations within your paper still count. Don’t forget that both the minimum and maximum limits to the word count are important on all drafts.]
For ease of grading, please make sure your paper is in Times New Roman, 12pt font, and double spaced.
REFERENCES:
Saltsman, Michael. “San Francisco’s Problem Isn’t Robots; It’s the $15 Wage Floor.” The Wall Street Journal 24 Nov. 2017.
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1967950208?pq-origsite=summonLinks to an external site.
UM-Library AccessLinks to an external site.
Disclaimer: Please note this article was chosen for its simplified economic approach to the case it is analyzing. Neither the political preferences of Mr. Saltsman, nor the opinions expressed in the editorial article are to be assumed as representative of the instructor. Furthermore, it is safe to say there is a much greater complexity to labor issues than this analysis affords.
GRADING:
For Writing Assignment 2, you are asked to submit a First Draft, review your peers (Peer Review), and submit a Revised Draft. Note the third submission is different from Writing Assignment 1.
The First Draft is worth 5 points. Submitting a completed assignment is necessary to earn these points. The First Draft is also evaluated by your Writing Fellow with an eye toward the Revised Draft and the Essay Rubric which will be used to grade the Revised Draft. You will received feedback and a hypothetical grade from your fellow.
The Peer review is assessed on the Peer Review Rubric.
Eighteen out of the 53 points possible in Writing Assignment 2 depends on your Peer Reviews.
Therefore, failure to complete the Peer Reviews will result in a loss of these 18 points.
Participation in the Peer Review depends on successfully submitting a First Draft on time. Therefore, failure to submit a First Draft results in an automatic loss of 18 points for lack of Peer Reviews, in addition to the 5 points associated with the First Draft. For your sake, please submit your First Draft on time!
The remaining 30 out of 53 points of Writing Assignment 2 is based on the content and quality of your essay as determined in the Revised Draft through the Essay Rubric. This is NOT a Peer Reflection, though the reflection process is an intermediary step in revising your essay.
FIRST DRAFT
Prepare your first draft of the letter requested in the prompt. You will be evaluated according to the Essay Rubric, but no grade will be assessed.
Your first draft is due before 10:00 am on February 15th (THURSDAY). Note, Canvas will treat a submission at 10:00.01 am as late. Late Assignments are given zero points.
A student failing to submit the first draft will not be able to participate in the peer review process, both in having their paper reviewed (obviously) and in not being allowed to review other papers. This effectively limits your grade to 30 of the 53 possible points for Writing Assignment 2.
Please be aware of the following:
The file format must be in Microsoft Word format. DO NOT upload a Google Doc, as this is a common source of corrupted files.
Please DO NOT put your name in the document that you upload. The peer review process should be anonymous, and we cannot remove your name from the documents once submitted.
There is no need to add a comment to your submission with your name. Canvas will link your submission to your student record since you had to log in to view this page.
Once you have uploaded your file, download and open the file to ensure it uploaded properly.
Please download your paper and open the document after uploading it, to ensure your paper properly uploaded.
PEER REVIEW
In providing feedback, your task is to help your peers identify areas that need the most attention. To guide you through the process of effectively providing feedback according to the essay rubric, you will be given a series of prompts that correspond to the essay rubric criteria.
This semester we are using the Canvas peer review tool within the assignment for the First Draft. Therefore, to complete the peer review, please click on the First Draft assignment above after the first draft due date. On the right side of the screen, you’ll find a link to your “Assigned Peer Reviews”. This is where you’ll complete the peer review assignments. Please review the Peer Review Guide before completing your peer reviews. Failure to properly submit the peer reviews will result in a zero.
NOTE:
The Canvas Peer Review System does not allow you to save and return to your peer reviews. Therefore it is advisable that you complete them in a separate document and then copy and paste in your responses when ready to submit the entire assignment.
Be careful to NOT submit your peer reviews as another submission to your first draft. While the Peer Reviews will be submitted within the same assignment, the process is different from your First Draft Submission. Please make sure to read the Peer Review Guide before completing your peer reviews.
As a general rule do NOT leave comments in the comments box of your assignments or the drafts your are reviewing. This eliminates the anonymity of peer reviews. Peer review comments should ONLY be left within the rubric comment boxes. For more information, please make sure to read the Peer Review Guide before completing your peer reviews.
Peer Review Guidelines
Print and read over your peer’s letter to quickly get an overview of the piece.
Read the letter more slowly keeping the assignment and essay rubric in mind.
Highlight the pieces of texts that let you directly address the feedback prompts in your online responses.
In your online responses, focus on larger issues (higher order concerns) of content and argument rather than lower order concerns like grammar and spelling.
Be very specific in your responses, referring to your peer’s actual language, mentioning terms and concepts that are either present or missing, and following the directions in the feedback prompts.
Use respectful language whether you are suggesting improvements to or praising your peer.
Feedback Prompts
Understanding Based on your class discussion and course readings, identify any important concepts that are missing. Identify any unnecessary concepts in use.
How can the author connect concepts in a more useful manner? For example, using your knowledge from class, how could the author improve their explanation of interactions between the various markets affected by these policies?
Critical Thinking Based on your class discussion and course readings, how could the author improve their analysis of the minimum wage increase and the automation policy (ban or tax, depending)?
How well does the author apply economic principles to justify his/her position? Suggest one (or two) additional ways the author could apply economics to their argument in order to make this letter more persuasive.
Are all outside sources properly cited?
Response Alignment with Audience The letter should be understandable to a person with a basic but not sophisticated understanding of economic principles. In this context, which parts were difficult to understand? Which parts were easy to understand?
Peer Review Grading Criteria
Your peer feedback will be graded on two primary criteria: Is it relevant, and is it specific. You will receive points according to the Peer Review Rubric:
Your Peer Review is due before 10:00 am on February 22nd (THURSDAY). Note this is also when the First Draft assignment will not longer be available.
REVISED DRAFT
Revising writing means re-seeing it. In your first writing assignment you explored how to use the peer review process as a means to ‘re-see’ your work through the Peer Reflection step of that writing assignment. Now, for Writing Assignment 2, you are asked to go the distance and not just reflect on the peer review experience, but fully revised your first draft given your peer review experience. Meaningful revision means changes at the sentence and paragraph level, and not simply changing word choice.
Revision Guidelines:
Re-read the situation and prompt.
Re-read the rubric and consider what a complete and effective response would include, noting what you do not fully address
Complete the process outlined in the Peer Reflection from Assignment 1, but for this assignment. *Do not submit a Peer Reflection for the Revised Draft.
Make a list of effective content you noticed in the writing of your peers.
Read and summarize the feedback you received from your peers.
With these things in mind, re-read your draft and mark places where you can improve the content..
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Dear San Francisco Board of Supervisors Members,
I’m writing to voice my worries and concerns about the proposed laws that try to
discourage automation in response to the worry that raising the minimum wage will result in job
losses.
I’d like to start by explaining the main issue that is being faced: how raising the minimum
wage might affect the job market. Businesses face increased labor expenses when the minimum
wage is raised to a legally binding level, which means it is set above the equilibrium price,
whereas non-binding does not influence equilibrium. A price floor is a government made
minimum price that is impossible to legally lower, whereas a price ceiling establishes the greatest
accepted price. Raising the minimum wage serves as a price floor for workers, potentially
affecting the job market by boosting labor costs for employers and influencing employment
dynamics. Increasing the minimum wage, which serves as a government-imposed price floor for
labor, directly raises labor expenses for firms. This cost increase may cause alterations in
employment dynamics, affecting the job market as firms deal with the financial consequences of
the mandatory wage rise.
The link between automation and labor is complex, with automation frequently used to
optimize processes, cut costs, and increase efficiency. A new minimum wage, especially if it is
significantly raised, can have an impact on the dynamics of automation and labor markets. The
greater labor costs resulting from the increased minimum wage may encourage enterprises to
invest more in automation technologies as a cost-cutting option. This transition has the potential
to enhance automation, which will have an impact on the labor market by changing employment
availability and needs. In the event of a minimum wage ban, firms may rely more on human
labor, thereby limiting the incentive for significant investments in automation. Changes in
manpower and automation have an impact on production costs, which in turn affect pricing and
availability of goods.
Businesses may find it more economical to invest in automation after a minimum wage
increase in order to lessen their reliance on labor. Low-skilled workers may lose their jobs as a
result, which worsens the same issue that the minimum wage was designed to solve. In this
particular situation, I don’t think that prohibiting automation is a workable way to address the
issues raised by the increase in the minimum wage.
When circling back to Ms. Kim’s proposal to prohibit tax on automation did not seem to
be the correct approach with the issues that are currently active. Although the goal might be to
ease worries about employment losses, this policy might have unfavorable economic effects.
Businesses that tax automation suffer additional costs, which could limit their capacity to
develop and maintain a competitive edge. Higher pricing for goods and services could be the
outcome of the increasing costs, which would be bad for customers and lessen economic
efficiency generally.
Taxing automation in order to discourage it might delay technical advancement as well as
the growth and development of sectors that depend on automation for efficiency. Over time, this
can restrict economic growth and reduce chances for new jobs to be created in developing
industries. It also leads to an increase in unemployed workers which can lead to a variety of not
only economic, but social issues as well.
To put it all together, I disagree with Ms. Kim’s tax on automation because I believe it
could unintentionally reduce economic efficiency, impede innovation, and diminish the
possibility of job creation in developing sectors of the economy. It is critical to recognize the
intricate interactions between the labor and automation markets and to take into account
alternative approaches that support economic expansion and job security.
Regards,
A Concerned Citizen
401 is the word count.
Saltsman, M. (2017, Nov 24). San francisco’s problem isn’t robots; it’s the $15 wage floor; the
city fears automation will replace workers–but its own policies make low-value jobs
illegal. Wall Street Journal (Online) Retrieved from
https://proxy.lib.umich.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/san-francisc
os-problem-isnt-robots-15-wage-floor/docview/1967950208/se-2
Dear San Francisco Board of Supervisors Members,
I’m writing to voice my worries and concerns about the proposed laws that try to
discourage automation in response to the worry that raising the minimum wage will result in job
losses.
I’d like to start by explaining the main issue that is being faced: how raising the minimum
wage might affect the job market. Businesses incur higher labor costs when the minimum wage
is raised to a legally binding level. The income of low-wage workers is increased by this change,
but it also affects other markets, especially the market for automation and the market for goods
made with labor, automation, or a combination of the two.
Businesses may find it more economical to invest in automation after a minimum wage
increase in order to lessen their reliance on labor. Low-skilled workers may lose their jobs as a
result, which worsens the same issue that the minimum wage was designed to solve. In this
particular situation, I don’t think that prohibiting automation is a workable way to address the
issues raised by the increase in the minimum wage.
When circling back to Ms. Kim’s proposal to prohibit tax on automation did not seem to
be the correct approach with the issues that are currently active. Although the goal might be to
ease worries about employment losses, this policy might have unfavorable economic effects.
Businesses that tax automation suffer additional costs, which could limit their capacity to
develop and maintain a competitive edge. Higher pricing for goods and services could be the
outcome of the increasing costs, which would be bad for customers and lessen economic
efficiency generally.
Taxing automation in order to discourage it might delay technical advancement as well as
the growth and development of sectors that depend on automation for efficiency. Over time, this
can restrict economic growth and reduce chances for new jobs to be created in developing
industries. It also leads to an increase in unemployed workers which can lead to a variety of not
only economic, but social issues as well.
To put it all together, I disagree with Ms. Kim’s tax on automation because I believe it
could unintentionally reduce economic efficiency, impede innovation, and diminish the
possibility of job creation in developing sectors of the economy. It is critical to recognize the
intricate interactions between the labor and automation markets and to take into account
alternative approaches that support economic expansion and job security.
Regards,
A Concerned Citizen
401 is the word count.
Saltsman, M. (2017, Nov 24). San francisco’s problem isn’t robots; it’s the $15 wage floor; the
city fears automation will replace workers–but its own policies make low-value jobs
illegal. Wall Street Journal (Online) Retrieved from
https://proxy.lib.umich.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/san-francisc
os-problem-isnt-robots-15-wage-floor/docview/1967950208/se-2
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
