Purpose You will need to be able to critically evaluate economic arguments and convey your reasoning to a general audience in writing. This writing assignment will help you develop these skills. You will need to demonstrate your ability to apply economic concepts and tools to different, more open-ended contexts. This will also help you develop your ability to apply and to view events through the lens of economics.The critical examination involves a few steps. First, translating a written argument into a form that can be analyzed using tools you have learned in class. The next step is to use these tools to critically examine the argument being made. The analysis involves doing more than merely paraphrasing the textbook, class notes, or using jargon. It involves things like identifying which model/tool is appropriate for this context, checking to see if the assumptions required are satisfied, identifying any changes in circumstances, and working through the predictions, etc. You need to be able to compare your analysis with the author’s arguments and be able to articulate any differences or similarities in a precise manner. The final step is translating all of this back into clear language that readers can easily understand.TaskThere will be two writing assignments in this course to give you practice and opportunities to get feedback on your writing. This is an individual writing assignment.For this writing assignment, you will be given an economic podcast and will be asked to critically evaluate it. You will be graded on the quality and thoroughness of your analysis. Therefore, you will also be graded on the clarity, flow, and overall cohesiveness of the writing in your paper.Podcast:https://freakonomics.com/podcast/reemployment-part-1/ (Links to an external site.)PromptThe beginning of the podcast states, “Covid-19 is the biggest job killer in a century. As the lockdown eases, what does re-employment look like Who will be first and who last? Which sectors will surge and which will disappear?” After listening to this podcast, the President of the United States asks you to come up with a critical evaluation regarding the Covid-19 pandemic and its impact on the labor market. Based on your report, the President will make its policy recommendations. You are to analyze one of the four economists' arguments/opinions in the podcast.Follow the paper outline below:Paper OutlineIntroduction (10 points): The introduction (first paragraph) briefly summarizes what you consider to be the main point(s) of the article. If there are many, focus on the one(s) that you will analyze in the assignment.Summary (10 points): A short summary of the podcast should be included. This summary should capture the key points presented in the podcast and any important facts or elements. Do not spend the whole assignment summarizing the entire article. Summaries should be succinct and to the point and be approximately one paragraph. Explain “your chosen” economists’ arguments (30 points): The President has heard about the “the above economist” but does not know enough to enact a policy. In this section you need to explain what the economist is arguing. (Don’t just summarize what they said. You need to demonstrate their argument using the models and tools you have learned throughout the semester).Critical Evaluation of the argument (40 points): This is the most important aspect of this assignment.Students should focus on whether they agree/disagree with the economist and what their recommendations may be. Students can also analyze how the material in the podcast will impact the economy in a macro setting. The analysis portion has the potential to be varied in nature. However, I recommend sticking to my guidelines below:To evaluate the argument you need first to understand the author’s arguments. Start by identifying the assumptions inherent in the argument, checking to see if the conclusions follow from these assumptions. Try to distinguish the argument from the evidence provided to support the argumentTo do the critical evaluation, essentially you should take apart the various steps in the argument and see if they make sense separately and as a whole. Can you use the tools learned in class to think about the argument in another way? Check to see if the author is missing anything in his/her argument or has used some tool or method incorrectly or inappropriately. Is there evidence that contradicts their argument? I expect you to use at least 1 economic model we have learned in class. You should be using the AS/AD model, the Classical model, the Phillips Curve, etc. Your models should also be detailed. Make sure you read explaining what the models mean and clearly demonstrate the economic implications. All models must be drawn by hand. Any models “grabbed” from the text or internet will not count and will adversely affect your grade. Your hand-drawn models should be scanned and of high-quality. Conclusion (10 points): It is important to have a strong conclusion since this is the last chance you have to make an impression on your reader. The goal of your conclusion isn’t to introduce any new ideas, but to sum up, everything you’ve written. Specifically, your conclusion should accomplish three major goals: Restate the main idea of your essay, or your thesis statement.Summarize the main sub-points of your essay.Leave the reader with an interesting final impression.Works Cited: Must cite at least 3 sources. Class notes/lectures can account for one source. The textbook can account for one source.How to format your assignmentYour assignment should be typed, double-spaced, and have a font size of 12 points.Minimum of 3 pages (not including models, works cited page).The assignment should be in Word.How to submit your assignmentYour assignment should be submitted through Canvas. Any drafts submitted through email will not be accepted.You will submit your writing as a word document. Other formats will not be accepted.Your models must be hand-drawn, scanned as an image, and pasted to your word document.PlagiarismRemember: NO PLAGIARISM!!! RubricWriting Assignment RubricCriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIntroduction5.0 ptsExcellentGrabs readers’ attention. Sets up the thesis statement. It gives an accurate and concise representation of the main arguments.4.0 ptsGoodThe thesis statement not attempted or hard to identify. It gives an accurate and concise representation of the main arguments.3.0 ptsCompetentNo thesis statement. Gives mostly accurate representation of main arguments.2.0 ptsProblematicNo thesis statement. Gives mostly inaccurate representation of main arguments. Too long and includes many arguments not addressed in the analysis.5.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSummary5.0 ptsExcellentThe summary begins with a clear topic sentence that states the main idea of the selection. Title and author of text are included if appropriate. All the important details are included. Details are in a logical order. Demonstrates a clear understanding of information in the podcast. Paraphrases information using own words.4.0 ptsGoodThe summary begins with a topic sentence that states the main idea of the selection. Title and author of text are included if appropriate. Important details are included but some might be missing. Ideas are in a logical order. Demonstrates an adequate understanding of information in the podcast. Paraphrases information using own words, as well as phrases and sentences from the text.3.0 ptsCompetentThe topic sentence may not state the main idea clearly or the main idea may not appear at the beginning of the summary. The title or author may not be included. Some critical information is missing. Ideas are in random order and not logical. Demonstrates a basic understanding of the information on the podcast.2.0 ptsProblematicThe summary does not state the main idea of the original selection. Title and author are not included. It contains only some details. Ideas are not in a logical order. Demonstrates little or no understanding of information in the text. Substantial copying of indiscriminately selected phrases or sentences.5.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalysis15.0 ptsExcellentParagraphs well organized by thought and flow logically. Smooth transition between ideas. Clear and easy to read sentences. No unnecessary repetitions. Economic terms and concepts clearly explained. Sources are referenced and cited correctly.10.0 ptsGoodParagraphs not always organized by thoughts but flow mostly logical. Mostly smooth transition between ideas. Some long, confusing sentences. Some minor unnecessary repetitions. Some economic terms and concepts used without a clear explanation. Sources are referenced and cited correctly.5.0 ptsCompetentParagraphs organization and flow need work. Some sentence/word problems make it difficult to understand the reasoning. Economic terms used frequently without attempt to explain them. Sources are mostly referenced and cited correctly. Lengthy quotations from article instead of concise summary if needed.2.0 ptsProblematicSignificant sentence/word problems make it difficult to understand the reasoning. Not completely written in words and paragraphs (e.g., bullet points, equations, graphs). Sources are referenced and cited incorrectly.15.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCritical Evaluation20.0 ptsExcellentDemonstrates independent thinking and critical reasoning. Uses evidence to refute/support arguments. Is able to recognize the limitations of the tools and make a clear conclusion. Uses appropriately the tools studied in class (or in other courses) to perform a complete analysis. Makes sensible inferences. Uses more than 5 academic references.15.0 ptsGoodShows some critical reasoning but mostly paraphrases sources or class materials. Has trouble making a clear conclusion and highlighting its strengths and weaknesses. Uses the tools studied in class (or in other courses) to perform the analysis but some elements may be missing. Uses between 4 and 5 academic references.10.0 ptsCompetentPresents the evidence but with little analysis. and/or Interpretation of reviewed sources confusing or contradictory. Uses class tools with significant conceptual errors or does not show clearly that has identified and understood the reviewed sources’ arguments. Uses tools studied in class (or in other courses), but important elements are missing and/or incorrect. Uses 2 academic references5.0 ptsProblematicNo critical reasoning, incomplete or incoherent analysis. Does not use appropriate tools for the analysis. Uses less than 2 academic reference20.0 ptsThis criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeConclusion5.0 ptsExcellentBriefly summarizes the analysis accurately. Indicates that the initial thesis statement has been demonstrated.4.0 ptsGoodAttempts to summarize the analysis. Some indications that the initial thesis statement has been demonstrated.3.0 ptsCompetentNone to minimal attempt to summarize the analysis. Too long and focusing on issues not discussed in the analysis.2.0 ptsProblematicNone to minimal attempt to summarize the analysis. Too long and focusing on issues not discussed in the analysis.5.0 ptsfollow the excellent please

You have just graduated from GCU with your MPA and landed a job as an assistant to the City of Phoenix manger. The City of Phoenix and GCU are collaborating to enact a quarter cent sales tax in order to extend the light rail down Camelback, making a stop at the main entrance of the campus. Using the readings from this topic, do the following in 500‐750 words.Describe the various stakeholders involved in this project with whom you may need to build trust.Describe all the factors you should consider when taking on this goal.Explain how you can use your knowledge of these factors to build trust with the various parties involved.Recommend best practices to build trust with all stakeholders involved.Use two to three scholarly resources to support your explanations.