Words: 490
Booker’s arguments rely heavily on the idea of: why mess with something that works? Throughout his article multiple examples of programs that worked in the past are given and the author then ties them back Into today’s economic situation and why the old plan should be expanded on. Booker also uses quite a bit of pathos throughout his argument by throwing in American youth, on multiple occasions he states how the American people are the country’s greatest asset heavily focusing on children and families for the majority of the second half of the article.
The Image of families being torn apart by corrupt justice systems is not a pleasant one, which is exactly why it does very well in supporting the idea of more government involvement in some aspects of American life. Expansion and empowerment of the people is the heart of the argument. Moving to Ryan’s article, which starts with a Jab at the big guys in Washington, His example of a high school taking a different approach to violence prevention and succeeding puts the article on a path to saying that’s what needs to be done with America, change.
Not expansion. Ryan’s article focuses heavily on what’s being done wrong, how Washington has been treating the poor and lack of coordination between programs against poverty just makes things messier. The Idea of empowerment, Just like in Booker’s argument is very present, giving the poor flexibility and choices and making them feel as though they have a chance to succeed and are not being oppressed and Isolated Is the key, “the best ant-poverty program Is economic growth” (Paul Ryan).
Overall both arguments were well written, well organized and sophisticated, but hat is all to be expected of highly respected political figure heads. Booker’s article related back to the original war on poverty much more than Ryan’s did, going back and picking out pieces that worked well was a good strategy while Ryan mainly attacked modern issues which made it hard to see why he wanted to stray away from original ideals in the first place. Ryan’s negative tone also made the overall paper less impacting, in some parts he Just sounds like a bitter old man, making his attacks on government practices to obvious.
Booker kept his tone positive while still dropping In empathetic aspects and making his article much more persuasive. However, Ryan’s paper seemed much more relatable in aspects of while he was talking about the poor he kept a kind of appeal towards the middle class, when he talked about integration of the poor Into communities. “Building on the Success of the War on Poverty; easily takes a win In this debate because of the appealing tone and the better topicality of the paper as a whole. A 1 OFF and a more reasonable standpoint makes the paper overall a better argument.