Carcass wrote:
Political Analyst: After the Soviet Union collapsed, some hoped that freedom would encourage Russians to multiply, but as a result of dislocation and insecurity, the Russian population continues to dwindle at the rate of 700,000 a year. The government proposes to address the problem with a wide range of financial incentives, along with investments in improved health care, road safety and the like. These are positive measures, but they have been tried before, to little avail. A better plan to reverse the population decline is to improve the country's governance in both the public and the private sphere. If a greater part of the population participated in important decisions and shared in the country's wealth, then larger families would result. In addition, if corruption and greed among the elite were curbed, public health would improve and average life expectancy would increase.
The first portion undermines what they tried before. The second is support for what they want to do.
Regards
Aren't premises suppose to facts and things that are considered to be truth? If so, then how can the second sentence be a premise as it is just an opinion, which hasn't been proven yet. Also if the second sentence is a premise then what is the main point?