The thing that stood out the most for the first graph is that it was the only graph that had negative values represented in a bar graph, so I was initially confused and intrigued. After looking at it for a second, I can initially tell that the graph is showing that there is a decrease in income for rural families. I like the simplicity that the graph has, though I do not quite understand what each portion fully represents. If there were anything to be changed about this graph, it would be to make it more clear what each color represents; as it is, it “states” what they are, but I do not understand it.
For the second graph, this graph was the first graph that had a region map on it, so I was curious as to what it was saying about the US. From an initial look, the graph is showing that, for the most part, there is a decline in income to farms around the country, with Midwest having the lowest income. I like how everything is color coated, as it makes it just that much easier to see what is going on in the graph, and there is nothing that I do not like about it. The graph is short and sweet. I would not change anything about this graph.
My graph just shows the trend in how much caffeine is in the coffee we drink, and I used this data as it was the quickest I could get to as I accidentally slept and was thusly on a tight schedule to finish this assignment. I am mapping different brands of coffee against each other to see which brands or types are the worst for you, and as it turns out, the “Dunkin’ Donuts Coffee with Turbo Shot” is the worst, raking up about 440 mg of caffeine per drink. I chose a bar graph for this graph as a bar graph is the universal go-to when it comes to graphs; most things fit in bar graphs fairly well.