How effectively did the author argue their point(s) in this piece? Your focus will NOT be on the content, but instead on the rhetorical choices--the style, the technique, the moves--that the author used. (For instance, you might be 100% pro-immigration, but still feel like an author wrote a weak pro-immigration argument because they slipped into logical fallacies or had a bad balance of ethos/pathos/logos.)  I'd like you to incorporate several concepts from the list below as you respond, demonstrating to me that you're synthesizing the ideas we've been covering. 

• Bloom's Taxonomy (with a focus on the top 3 tiers, considered the "critical thinking tiers")
• Ethos/pathos/logos
• Logical Fallacies
• Inference
• Definition
• Assumption
• Taste
• Values

This is my article: What Economists Think About Immigration Doesn't Really Matter
Dec. 17, 2021 By Peter Coy (Opinion Writer)