To end the dependence of child labor in mines and prostitution the Tanzanian government must first address the issue of poverty in Mererani, Tanzania. The town produces a 300 million dollar business because it is the only place to find the rare Tanzanite gem. The children working in the mines do not see any of the money collected for these gems. The lucky ones work for a dollar a day, most go without pay or food for days on end. When mining is not an option women, and female children turn to prostitution to feed their families. The premises below support the argument to end child labor in Tanzania and raise awareness for the poverty these families suffer:
· Three kilometers outside the town, some 30,000 miners work to depths of up to 300 meters without safety regulations or a daily wage.
· There are no safety regulation to protect children from dynamite accidents, collapsing mines, and floods.

· Hundreds of independently operated shafts account for nearly 80% of Mererani’s annual tanzanite production.
Hello,

I reviewed my initial argument, analyzed it, and rewrote it to create a deductive, sound, strong argument. I believe my initial argument was backed by emotion due to the attachment I created with the Tanzanian children. After stepping back and removing emotion I was able to analyze the information logically.
Premise-conclusion form of the initial argument:
P1 - Three kilometers outside the town, some 30,000 miners work to depths of up to 300 meters without safety regulations or a daily wage.
P2 - There are no safety regulation to protect children from dynamite accidents, collapsing mines, and floods.
P3 - Hundreds of independently operated shafts account for nearly 80% of Mererani’s annual tanzanite production.
C - To end the dependence of child labor in mines and prostitution the Tanzanian government must first address the issue of poverty in Mererani, Tanzania.
My initial argument was inductive, unsound, and weak due to its reliance on emotion. P2, “there are no safety regulations to protect children from dynamite accidents, collapsing mines, and floods” relies on the observers’ emotional attachment to the children. Facts such as the number of deaths or injury over a specified amount of time would make P2 strong. The observer may reject the premise due to lack of emotional attachment, so the argument is unsound leading to an inductive argument. The combination of an inductive unsound argument based on emotion makes the argument weak. P1 and P3 alone do not offer enough fact based information to