Analysis of Gloria Jimenez's "Against All Odds and Against the Common Good"
Gloria Jiménez wrote an essay at Tuffs University in 2003 named, “Against All Odds and Against the Common Good (Jiménez 116). The purpose of this essay is to persuade and support the following thesis: “Still, when all is said and done about lotteries bringing a vast amount of money into the lives of many people into the lives of a few, the states should not be in the business of urging people to gamble (Jiménez 116).” The evidence given in support of toward this argument does not point toward the proper thesis identified in the beginning of the essay. Jiménez begins with little confidence in her ability to persuade the states to get out of the
…show more content…
She then addresses the reply of some who would reduce her argument to say, “Poor people don’t know how to manage their money, so we ought to remove temptation from their eyes”, by concluding that the state should not tempt anyone, rich or poor (Jiménez 118). If that was her point in the beginning, than why even address the poor people? Although her intention was not to attack, I think her comments could put some on the offensive as she predicted. A very relevant point the author makes is the implication the lottery could make to some that the lottery is a reasonable method to obtain wealth. While some will jump to conclusions, the lottery business is open about the actual chances of winning. I do not agree with the author that that means they are discouraging work or education. There is no direct point that I can see supporting that assumption. Jiménez herself tells us that she has included presumptions when she tells us, “Presumably the only new jobs created by the lottery are the relatively few jobs of the people who dream up the slogans or who are in charge of collection and processing the receipts (Jiménez 117).” This is also a characteristic that leads to doubt in the reader and is a weakness in the structure of this essay.