The originator of this argument concludes that the death rate is higher among those who do not have jobs compare to those who have regular employment, rests weakly on these three assumptions. First, the author had hyphened a robust relation between such deleterious diseases such as cancer or heart diseases with unemployment which is basically questionable. Second, the originator mentioned that, if government increase the budgets for public healthcare and medical research, it would consequence in declining economics prospects. Finally, denying what are the harmful effects of employment in modern eras completely is another fallacious hypothesizes for reaching to that conclusion.
Clearly, ratiocinating a conclusion has needed strong reasons that had been accepted logistically. Moreover, for correlating disparate subjects and facts, we need reasons that we could accede them rationally. The author waned the probability of accepting the promulgated issue, unemployment is a significant health issue just like cancer and heart disease, by not giving sufficient testimonies and substantiated surveys for concurring that generally. Hence, linking two different issues without any given reasons put this premise under the vacillate of the reader.
The other assumption made by the author to arrive at the conclusion is the wrong perception that spending monies and resources on health care would conclude to abasement of economy. For instance, we have seen a health program that ran by the government of Iran recently, which is calling " Rouhani care" that the denomination adduced from the president’s name, has shown significant success by achieving a comprehensive insurance ability for all of the people from different castes in Iran which is flexible and adaptable with different revenues. This program has enhanced both health condition and economic prosper for whole country.
Regarding to, argument relies on this assumption that unemployment would definitely harms the health condition genuinely. Without notifying the fact that, what are the detrimental effects of employment and job circulations on demotic health? Albeit, it had been seen such diseases like obesity, heart problems and numerous other ailments that were the consequences of erroneous behavior while working. Thus, not declaring those efficacious behaviors that is producing by employment is weakening the conclusion too.
In sum, the author of this argument relies heavily on its assumptions, perhaps too heavily, which has made us to question the validity of the conclusion. For strengthening the argument, the originator should involve other testimonies and more powerful reasons and surveys that caused him to reach the conclusion, with eliminating wrong perceptions that were mentioned earlier.
The originator of this
argument
concludes that the death rate is higher among those who do not have jobs compare to those who have regular
employment
, rests
weakly
on these three
assumptions
.
First
, the
author
had hyphened a robust relation between such deleterious
diseases
such as cancer or heart
diseases
with unemployment which is
basically
questionable. Second, the originator mentioned that, if
government
increase the budgets for public healthcare and medical research, it
would consequence
in declining economics prospects.
Finally
, denying what are the harmful effects of
employment
in modern eras completely is another fallacious hypothesizes for reaching to that conclusion.
Clearly
, ratiocinating a
conclusion
has needed strong
reasons
that had been
accepted
logistically
.
Moreover
, for correlating disparate subjects and facts, we need
reasons
that we could accede them
rationally
. The
author
waned the probability of accepting the promulgated issue, unemployment is a significant
health
issue
just
like cancer and heart
disease
, by not giving sufficient testimonies and substantiated surveys for concurring that
generally
.
Hence
, linking two
different
issues without any
given
reasons
put this premise under
the vacillate
of the reader.
The other
assumption
made by the
author
to arrive at the
conclusion
is the
wrong
perception that spending monies and resources on
health
care would conclude to abasement of economy.
For instance
, we have
seen
a
health
program that ran by the
government
of Iran recently, which is calling
"
;
Rouhani
care"
; that the denomination adduced from the president’s name, has shown significant success by achieving a comprehensive insurance ability for
all of the
people
from
different
castes in Iran which is flexible and adaptable with
different
revenues. This program has enhanced both
health
condition and economic prosper for whole country.
Regarding to
,
argument
relies on this
assumption
that unemployment would definitely
harms
the
health
condition
genuinely
. Without notifying the fact that, what are the detrimental effects of
employment
and job circulations on demotic
health
? Albeit, it had been
seen
such
diseases
like obesity, heart problems and numerous other ailments that were the consequences of erroneous behavior while working.
Thus
, not declaring those efficacious behaviors
that is
producing by
employment
is weakening the
conclusion
too.
In sum, the
author
of this
argument
relies
heavily
on its
assumptions
, perhaps too
heavily
, which has made us to question the validity of the
conclusion
. For strengthening the
argument
, the originator should involve other testimonies and more powerful
reasons
and surveys that caused him to reach the
conclusion
, with eliminating
wrong
perceptions that
were mentioned
earlier.