Understanding Rhetorical Structures as They Pertain to Audience
Understanding Rhetorical Structures as they pertain to audience, purpose, and context Understanding Rhetorical Structure Colton Kiefer EN1420 This paper is about the understanding of the Rhetorical Structures as they pertain to audience, purpose, and context and how they affect the argument of whether taxes should be raised on higher income brackets in order to fund social programs for at-risk and underserved, low income children. I will discuss the relationship between the audience, purpose, and context to the context of the argument. Understanding Rhetorical Structures
How do audience, purpose, and context affect the argument of whether taxes should be raised on higher income brackets in order to fund social programs for at-risk and underserved, low income children. I will discuss the relationship between the audience, purpose, and context to the context of the argument. Discussion The goal of this discussion is to see the relationship between audience, purpose, and context of should Taxes be raised for higher income brackets in order to fund social programs for at-risk, underserved, and low income children.
The first audience for this group are wealth fortune 500 CEO’s. They are considered the in the higher income bracket in my opinion. They need to be educated on the understanding that even though most lower income families struggle, it is not because they are not trying. The economy has taken its toll on a lot of jobs here in the US over the past couple of years and even though they are working a full time job and sometimes two full time jobs, they cannot afford any kind of social program for their children.
The present economy conditions are hurting the lower income families to the point that they struggle to make ends meet and can sometimes barley afford to put food on the table for their children. The higher income bracket would need to see just how little the additional taxes would take from them and what the benefits of those taxes could do for a low income family struggling to make ends meet. They still could possibly not be receptive to the idea, but giving them examples of the cost and benefits of such programs I think they would start to understand.
The second audience for this group is the low income families of at-risk, and underserved, low income children. They need to be educated on the benefits that could come from the higher taxes. In my opinion, the higher income bracket can afford the higher taxes to fund some of these programs. The cost of living, food, gas, and housing all affect the income of many families in the US. If they understood what could come from the taxes, they could get some reissuance as to vote on such a bill if it came up to vote for the public.
Education on the subject of the current tax laws would be a good example of what the different taxes brackets that are used today in the US. Lower income families would jump on the idea of being able to send their children to a soccer camp, or baseball camp. According to an article on “Taxing the rich is good for the economy”, raising taxes on the higher income bracket would reduce the taxes on low and middle income families. This would also allow for those families to keep more of their income to use towards these programs. All in all I think it would be a beneficial idea to entertain.
The context of the economy, food, and taxes all play an important role in this argument. The higher income bracket would be resistant to the idea until they were presented with facts on the cost and the minimal decrease in income for them. The lower income families would be blessed with some relief with their children’s social experience and the ability to provide more learning resources to them. References Taxing the rich is good for the economy Retrieved from http://www. marketplace. org/topics/economy/commentary/taxing-rich-good-economy By Robert Reich Marketplace for Wednesday, April 18, 2012 Marketplace. org