While reading Anna Quindlen's piece, i noticed that she used her own voice to convey her point and avoided the use of inflated language. What i liked best about her essay was when she stated, "sometimes I think we would be better off if we forgot about the broad strokes and concentrated on the details." That made me view things from another perspective and for that reason, i agree with her because we often neglect the fact that these are actual people, who probably once had what we have and lost it. And although I agree with what she says "We turn an adjective into a noun: the poor, not poor people; the homeless, not Ann or the man who lives in the box or the woman who sleeps on the subway grate," i believe that most of the times we unconsciously say it that way because we think that by saying the homeless or the poor, others know that the word "people" or them being without anything as she mentioned, is implied. I enjoyed her essay and I thought her writing was concise and to the point.