1.The similarities that are discussed in reading 4.1 and 4.2 is the way social class is distinguished from each other in New York city. In both readings we can identify that it speaks about higher ,middle ,and lower class in which are identified by economic status . The difference that I noticed is that reading 4.1 adds educational level to the social class but in 4.2 we can see that it only distinguishes class based on economic states, most specifically your yearly income. 

2.I’m not surprised about this graph because it distinguished brooklyn,queens,and manhattan based on income which is fair because most people that live by soho or west village definitely have a higher income than a person like me that lives in brooklyn .In the graph that Professor Artinian showed of train F we can see that mostly the graph it’s really high in manhattan compared to queens where the income doesn’t go above 50k ; in delancey street the graph gets low because most people that live by delancey street in manhattan right next to the williamsburg bridge live in projects but crossing the bridge towards williamsburg where the Domino park is located the income since to be higher since there’s no projects around that area.( the graph wasn’t working for me so I used what the professor showed)

3.After reading 4.1 and 4.2 I noticed that social class is based more on economic power, basically on how deep are your pockets .I noticed that the wealthier communities are around more prestige neighborhoods of new york city compared to the lower class communities are at lower income areas of new york city like brownsville , delancey street,dyckman ect.This graphs emphasizes how subway stations distinguish economic disparities and social class around new york city.