Revised Conclusion

This post is to examine my original conclusion and to create a more effective conclusion to wrap up my rhetorical analysis.

I think my new conclusion is more effective because it talks about the rhetorical strategies used in the article rather than the actual controversy. This conclusion is aiming to end with a "so what" wrap up. It gives one new fact about minimum wage workers because it helps show why this topic is so important.

My original conclusion: 

Minimum wage will always be something that will need to be discussed, but it is it’s not always easy to find someone who has support to back up their argument. Krueger is a great person to look to for answers in this area because of his education and career in economics. This article employs has many rhetorical strategies that it uses. The strongest method Krueger uses is his logical aspect and credibility. Through both of these rhetorical strategies, Kruger effectively conveys that an appropriate minimum wage is $12 an hour and $15 an hour is just too much.

My revised conclusion:

Krueger effectively conveys his argument of raising the minimum wage past $12/ hour would bring unnecessary risk for the American economy. His strong use of credibility and appeal to logic offer legitimate reasons for the audience to agree. Because there are around 20.6 million near minimum wage workers, this controversy is important and growing. The author addresses this wide audience as he writes with a knowledgeable yet common tone to reach his broad audience of The New York Times. The rhetorical choices made by Krueger in his article provide and effective argument on the rise of the minimum wage.