David K. Shipler presents many views from across the political spectrum regarding the causes of poverty in the United States in The Working Poor: Invisible in America. Shipler states in his introduction, “This book is about [the working poor], their families, their dreams, their personal failures, and their country's greatest failures” (Shipler 4). While it presents multiple points of view, it tends to favor explanations of the causes of poverty espoused by those who adhere to left-wing ideology. Shipler states that the working poor are “shot, hurt, and defeated” and “when an exception interrupts this cycle of failure, it speaks of the realization of the American dream” (Shipler 5). The “American myth,” as Shipler calls it, is embraced by those on the right and denounced by those on the left. While Shipler doesn't offer many solutions to poverty, his diagnosis is consistent with how many on the left would also diagnose it. Shipler attempts to persuade the reader by favoring left-wing positions over right-wing ones and approaching the issue of poverty by presupposing the problem of poverty from a left-wing perspective. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay One of the ways Shipler gets the reader to agree with his position is by appealing to pity to gain sympathy for illegal immigrants or the working poor. At the beginning of almost every chapter there is an anecdote from a migrant worker, a minimum wage worker, a single mother, or something else. By presenting these stories before examining the issue of poverty in that particular chapter, Shipler allows the reader to see a “human side” of poverty. Americans who subscribe to right-wing ideology usually have no sympathy for illegal immigrants. Indeed, many on the right believe that illegal immigrants are not the victims of the United States, but the opposite. Shipler tells the story of Candalaria, a Mexican immigrant to the United States who struggles to keep up with the demand of her job to make minimum wage. If he didn't make the request that day, he would have to pay the difference back to his boss (Shipler 78). Even though she started work at 7 am, her boss wouldn't let her come in until 9 am. This anecdote allows the reader to connect with Candalaria and may convince him to sympathize. This sympathy influences the reader to believe in passing legislation that helps migrant workers, which is a common belief in left-wing ideology. New York Times writer Ron Suskind compares Shipler to a “colossus at the county fair,” whose appeals for mercy “wear down the giant” that is the reader (Suskind, Can't Win For Losing). The language Shipler uses in the book strongly favors left-wing explanations for the causes of poverty over right-wing explanations. From the beginning of the book, Shipler places more blame on society than on the individual. Shipler's statement that the focus of the book is on the “personal failures of the working poor and the greater failures of their country” is an example of this (Shipler 4). While he acknowledges that the individual plays a role in their personal situation of poverty, he believes the country has failed them even more. Shipler describes the poor as a victim in society throughout the book. He compares tax preparers to predators who operate out of “sleazy check-cashing joints” (Shipler 15). Use similes to compare migrant workers to seeds and fertilizers, describing to the worker how the company treats workers.