Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
-Robert Breunig
-Professor of Economics at the Australian National University
-Supporter of immigration into Australia
-Tackles the issue from an economic perspective
-Left wing ideologies
-Satyajeet Marar
-Director of Policy for Sky News
- sides against immigration
- conservative political views
- argues primarily on the social impact of immigration
a
- Strong benefits to the Australian economy.
- Does not negatively impact our society and workers.
- Targets readers who side with immigration and how it impacts Australia economically.
- Left wing ideologies.
- Numerical evidence and economic trends provided.
- Omits certain societal impacts and the opinions of the general population
“Opponents of Australia’s strong immigration program will be disappointed.”
“Not only does population growth help with GDP growth overall, but it helps with GDP per capita growth too… The Treasury estimates that 20% of our per capita wealth generated over the last 40 years has been due to population factors.”
“Immigrants can also bring cultural and demographic benefits. And until infrastructure catches up, they can increase congestion. But immigration doesn’t seem to harm either jobs or wages, a point the Morrison government is right to acknowledge.”
- Australia has recently had 2 recessions due to immigration.
- Magnifies the incompetence of the Australian government
- Ommits any success stories of similar impact to justify the anti-government political stance he takes.
- Therefore, their support of immigration is incorrect
- Entices us to think more negatively about not only the government, but also their immigration policy as a whole.
“We’ve actually had two recessions in this time if we consider GDP on a per-capita basis. This, combined with stagnant real wage growth and sharp increases in congestion and the price of housing and electricity in our major cities, could explain why the Australian success story is inconsistent with the lived experience of so many of us.”
“Our governments have proven to be terrible central planners, often rejecting or watering down the advice of independent expert bodies like Infrastructure Australia and the Productivity Commission due to political factors.”
“Why would we trust them to not only get the answer right now, but to execute it correctly?”
-Both integrate a wide variety of techniques relating to pathos, logos and ethos
-Most impactful techniques in both articles focus on rhetoric questioning
-Difference in how they address the issue, one on economic effects and the other focusing on the societal impacts.
-Breunig tried to persuade the audience more through the use of statistics and economic evidence
- Marar leans more towards the side of persuasive and emotional language.
It can be thoroughly concluded that both authors strategically used form, structure and language to convey their contrasting points on immigration.