Can some please review and grade my issue and argument essays. Your feedback will really help me to improve

Governments should invest as much in the arts as they do in the military.

Author claims that government should invest as much in arts as they do in the military. While hundred or thousands of billions get invested in military every year for most of the countries to invest the same amount is art makes author's point little exaggerated.
Investing in art is vital for every government to make sure that aesthetic values of culture, encouragement for artists to explore and advance, diversity in different art forms and related fields are maintained. However, investment in art and military forces are not commensurate since they belong to different groups.
With belligerent situation going on every now and then between some or the other country, it is vital for every country to make sure that the military is well equipped. Contention going on between USA and North Korea mandates both the countries to be well equipped with advanced military technology and weapons. India China giving implications for war over border dispute mandates government of both the countries to prepare for the worst situation. Hence investment in military is impossible to eschew.
While author wants to encourage art, practically to increase and fund art would not require as much funding as military. Since every advance military equipment would cost a lot of money but the same is not valid for art. To increase art government can fund exhibitions, encourage universities and schools to galvanize interested students to pursue their career in that and provide required support for those already involved. While all these measures requires investment from government, it is less likely that investment required is as much as military.
Since for protection of country and while every developed country prepared for war with nuclear weapons with them, I disagree with author's claim that investment in art should be as much as military. Rather it should be analysed through requirement of that domain.

**********************************************************************************************************************************************

A recent study indicates that children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal have lower levels of tooth decay than children living in suburban areas in the United States, despite the fact that people in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal receive little to no professional dental care, while people in suburban areas in the United States see a dentist an average of 1.25 times per year. Thus, regular dental care is not helpful in preventing tooth decay.


Argument states that despite getting little or non dental care children living in Himalayan mountain region of Nepal have lower level levels of tooth decay than children in suburban areas of United States, who sees dentist an average of 1.25 times per year.
Here conclusion of dental care not being helpful for impeding tooth decay seems hasty and incorrect.
The most important point here is comparison doesn't take into account the weather conditions of Himalayan region and Suburban areas of United states. If weather condition and their food habits are different it has obvious effects on levels of tooth decay. Though it is mentioned that children for suburbs of US visit dentist often, it is not the only factor for preventing tooth decay. It is possible that children are maintaining malign food and dental care habits like having chocolates in excess or not brushing twice a day causing them to have tooth decay even after getting proper dental care.
Argument states about the study conducted, but no details about the study like how it is conducted, on how many children it is conducted, what were their eating habits etc. are provided. Hence reliability on that study to conclude inefficient dental care is incorrect. Also argument mentions only average of times children see a doctor, it could be some children are seeing dentist quarterly, who have no dental decay, while some children are seeing them once a year or none causing increased level of dental decay. Hence invalidating the conclusion based on average.
Given information doesn't mention qualification, expertise and experience which dentists children see. It is possible that children studied from suburbs of US sees a dentist who is a tyro and hence not able to prevent decay completely. While dentists from Himalayan region are experienced and qualified having knowledge of the exact required treatment.
In my opinion regular dental care is necessary to avoid tooth decay problems but it is not sufficient. Diligence in many other habits is required to prevent tooth decay, which given argument fails to take into consideration.
*************************************************************************************************************************************************

Thank you