Ehrenreich acknowledges that because she can return to her comfortable, middle-class standard of living whenever she wants to, her experiment doesn’t really allow her to genuinely experience or feel the desperation and negative long-term effects of surviving on a low-wage income. Nevertheless, do you think her experience enabled her and her readers to acquire a better understanding of the difficulties of surviving on low-wage pay, or was Ehrenreich essentially an outsider who could never truly comprehend the plight of the working poor? Support your opinion with examples and reasons.

I do think her experience enabled readers to acquire a better understanding of the difficulties of surviving on low-wage pay. This book details what it is like to be someone who does not have enough money to do more than get by and gives readers an insight of what it is like to live that way. No two people will have the same experiences and what is considered to be low wage differs for everybody so she cannot be an outsider. She provides examples of having to apply to job after job after job so she can have money to do the sole task of living. She also talks about having to go from place to place because she could not afford them. Finally, she could not even look for homes because she was too busy trying to have a stable income. She displays many of the difficulties to her readers in this book.

Explanation:

Sorry if this is bad answer, but it gave me a 100% on edge

the addition that would strengthen melissa’s thesis statement, both the dark game and the code book explain the importance of codebreaking, is :

main ideas of each book

melissa should discuss the main ideas of each book because these ideas will fully support her thesis statement. through these details, readers will also understand the importance of codebreaking that melissa referred to, which was inspired by the books.

plz mark me brainliest!

hope this !

explanation: