Using example from the readings in question, write a formal essay of 850 to 900 words in response to one of the options below. Your paper must have a unique argument that is supported by exploring distinct points of comparison that you find between the arguments of the two texts, which you must also quote correctly.

Ask yourself – do the texts come to similar conclusions, or vastly different ones? If both texts cover a particular idea, in what ways do they handle it differently? Which text did you find more convincing? To answer these types of questions effectively, you must not only describe what you think, but explain how and why you’ve come to these conclusions. You can do this by coming up with distinct points of comparison and using them as your support and analysis.

References and general format should follow the APA style, which means you will also have to include a References page at the end. Please use a reasonable font style and size (Times New Roman, 12 for example). Secondary sources are not required, but if used, you must cite them properly.

• The articles “Inequality and the American Dream” and “Confronting Inequality” both deal with the same economic issue, and while they don’t have any massive disagreements on this issue, they carry relatively different attitudes in describing its nature, its cause, and any possible solutions. Using distinct points of comparison from both articles, explain how you think each author handles this issue and what major differences (or similarities) there are between them.

• Karen Olsson’s “Up Against Wal-Mart” and Sebastian Mallaby’s “Progressive Wal-Mart. Really” are two articles on the same topic with VERY different viewpoints. Olsson believes Wal-Mart exploits and keeps down the low-income population with their employment practices, while Mallaby claims that Wal-Mart actually helps the poor with its good business and cheap prices. Using distinct examples from both articles, compare and contrast these divergent stances and explain which argument you find more convincing.