Public health vs. livelihood & revenue — total ban on tobacco products and smoking? Statement: Should there be a total ban on tobacco products and smoking in India? Arguments: I. Yes — it is wrong to smoke away millions of rupees. II. No — thousands of workers in the tobacco industry would lose employment. III. No — the government would lose substantial tax revenue from these products.

Introduction / Context:Evaluating a total ban on tobacco requires balancing public health against livelihoods and fiscal realities. Strong arguments are those that directly bear on feasibility and significant consequences, not moralizing statements without policy substance.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• I moralizes expenditure on smoking — a value judgment without policy mechanism.
• II highlights immediate job losses to a large workforce if a total ban is imposed.
• III points to foregone tax revenue if products are banned.

Concept / Approach:

• Strong policy reasoning weighs transitional costs and socioeconomic impact.
• Fiscal loss alone is not a decisive argument if public health gains dominate; employment disruption is a tangible, near-term cost requiring mitigation.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Common Pitfalls:

Final Answer: