In this academic article, Gale Jr., Foreman, and Capehart claim that “public health policies intended to reduce the incidence of smoking-related diseases adversely affect the tobacco industry” (1). The authors seek to provide background on the tobacco industry along with its role in the economy, the impacts of declining tobacco use, and the businesses and farmers most affected by the changing tobacco industry. Throughout the article, Gale Jr., Foreman, and Capehart offer a logical and comprehensive, though slightly elitist argument that public health policy negatively affects businesses that deal with tobacco products, especially small communities and farmers. One of the authors’ primary strengths in this source is the use of logos. …show more content…
Throughout the paper, Gale Jr., Foreman, and Capehart consider the impacts of the declining tobacco industry and loss of jobs on both large companies and small businesses and farmers. According to the authors, “new jobs created by diverting tobacco dollars to other sectors are thinly distributed around the country” depending on how governments decide to spend excise tax revenues (12). While about 5,000 jobs may be lost in tobacco manufacturing, 11,600 to 15,100 farming jobs would be lost; however the authors do point out that “it is difficult to precisely estimate employment impacts on farming” because most tobacco jobs are part-time and some decline in tobacco production would be due to farmers retiring or switching to other farm enterprises (12-13). The complexity and inclusivity of considering both big tobacco businesses and small farmers contributes to the strength of this argument by making it seem fair-minded and …show more content…
Since the authors’ are all three economists, the economic perspective in this writing is very explicit. All three authors are experts in their field and are definitely concerned about the economy. By considering the declining tobacco trends, roles of international trade, and where tobacco dollars go, the authors are able to make a fair claim that the tobacco industry is indeed declining. A business perspective can be seen as the authors look at the impact of these policies on both big and small business. A legal perspective is used to evaluate current tobacco policy and antismoking measures.
While all of these perspectives are explicitly addressed, perhaps unintentionally a political view is implied when the authors discuss transitional assistance. One of the holes in the argument is the logical fallacy that all farmers will need and want government assistance in transitioning offered by “different levels of Government, private foundations, financial institutions, or private business”