Hi, Below I will be attaching my writing piece. I will attach the rough draft b

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 DRAFTPrepare 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 REVIEWIn 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
UnderstandingBased 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 ThinkingBased 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 AudienceThe 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 DRAFTRevising 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..