Rhetorical Analysis Of What's So Bad About Being Poor

For most people living in America during the twenty-first century, they have everything they will ever need within their grasp: access to food, clothing, a house, and all things needed for living a comfortable life. Looking back, this was not always the case; people used to be poor, but now society has moved away from that life. Charles Murray expresses concern for the same issue in “What’s So Bad about Being Poor?” In the article, he discusses how people are oblivious to what it is like to be poor and addresses his audience including policy makers. Murray strengthens his argument by providing thought experiments and giving his audience an idea of what it would be like to be poor while addressing important values, but his assumptions applied to the diversity of culture while never being poor himself, limits his argument to be less effective.
Throughout the article, Murray persuades his ideas on his readers by including scenarios in the thought experiments by placing his audience in different life circumstances. He addresses the audience directly when he says “I propose a thought experiment based on the premise that tomorrow you had to be poor” (Murray 36). Murray builds common ground with his audience by giving insightful thoughts on questioning what it would be like to be poor. He has never …show more content…
Including the thought experiments and establishing a relationship with the audience through important values addressed, Murray writes an analysis of the declining poverty of this decade, but was ineffective by casting doubt to his audience about his assumption and position of authority. As time goes on, more people are enjoying prosperity, but it is important to have values and live a meaningful life, despite the circumstances, anyone can find this