Leonhardt begins by sharing his thoughts about a book by Thomas Piketty called “Capital in the Twenty-First Century.” Leonhardt tells us that this book is “...one of the most ambitious (and best reviewed) books on the subject…” (Leonhardt). Leonhardt also tells the reader that Piketty’s occupation is a professor of Economics. When Leonhardt tells us this, it makes the reader believe what he is reading even more. Giving us this information makes it look like his evidence is sufficient and trustworthy because it gives the reader a reason to believe what Leonhardt is saying. Becker/Murphy’s article is a little different. …show more content…
In the first and third paragraph of this article, Becker and Murphy use numerous numbers and percentages that distract you from the reading, ultimately making it not affect people as well as Leonhardt's article. This article also uses multiple graphs that are very confusing and hard to read. Now maybe for the intended reader this article may have been more interesting, but that does not hide the fact that they use a lot of percentages and graphs that are not easily understandable. Leonhardt expresses his facts in a different way in his article. He does not use as many numbers or graphs as the other article and it is much easier to pay attention to. This article also pulls you into reading it better than the