Sometimes, I kinda wonder if what I write seems to go over everyone's head.
I did summarize the article, that's what the first paragraph was.
Most of the crap that my professor thought should be cited was my own reasoning.
For the rest of it? Well, why should I even have to provide a citation for the public reaction to an event? The common rule is that if something comes from 3 or more sources, it doesn't need to be cited. When there's millions of people complaining about the same thing, I'm pretty sure I don't need to cite anything when I state that the public reaction is largely negative.
And, for the love of Ahadi, why did she think my essay was about elasticity? Only the last two paragraphs focused on that, because I wanted to end by predicting (very accurately) what would happen next. My essay was actually about the potentially impending market failure, which caused the events to happen, that were only stated in the article.
Okay, I'm done now.





