In the memo, the author concludes that if people seek longer and healthier lives, they should live in small cities. The writer reaches this conclusion based on comparing the number of physicians, the days of sick leave taken by workers that are reported by the businesses, and the average age of city dwellers in Masonton, which is a big city, and Leeville, which is a small town in the vicinity of Masonton. Nevertheless, while the conclusion drawn by the author might hold water, it rests on several unfounded assumptions that, if not substantiated, dramatically weaken the persuasiveness of the argument.
First of all, as it is obvious, every worker has the right to use its day-off option, which is two and a half days per month. People in big cities usually are more involved in other things than just working. Consequently, it is possible that workers in Masonton pretend to be sick to ask for an extra day off. In other words, they may make sickness an excuse not to go to work and do their postponed other tasks. What excuse is more convincing than being sick? If this scenario has merit, then the writer's assertion based on the comparison between the days workers do not get to work because of sickness is significantly hampered.
Secondly, the number of physicians has nothing to do with the number of patients. In small cities, one or two doctors might seem adequate since people, regardless of the location of their place of living, can go to the doctor easily. On the contrary, big cities are usually divided into several districts that are connected to each other by highways. Each of these regions must have its own doctor or even hospital so the patients can visit the doctor in a more convenient way and without being stuck in traffic congestion on highways. The higher number of physicians in Masonton than in Leville might be due to its bigger area, not the higher number of sick people. The argument does not hold water if the above is true.
Finally, people, particularly youngsters, have a tendency to leave their small towns and live in big cities because of the job opportunities and other high-level facilities offered in these cities. This immigration from small towns to big cities, which is a common phenomenon, especially in recent decades, leaves the small town with older people. It is possible that the higher average age number of Leeville habitats in comparison to Masonton is because of this event. If it is true that the number of youngsters is far higher in big cities than in small towns, the credibility of the writer's claim decreases substantially.
To recapitulate, it is possible that living in the equanimity and healthier atmosphere of small cities results in its residents' longevity. Nonetheless, as it stands now, the argument relies on three groundless assumptions that render its conclusion unpersuasive at best and specious at worst. Therefore, the author must provide additional evidence on three fronts: the possibility that workers in big cities use sickness as an excuse not to go to work in order to do other stuff in big cities as an established technique in large cities, the impact of a city area on the required number of doctors, and the number of young people in big cities and small towns.