Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Causes of junk food
Reason why taxes should be imposed on unhealthy foods to combat obesity
Causes of junk food
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Causes of junk food
For years, the United States government has been trying to find a way to lower the obesity in the country. However, the approach it is using, i.e. taxing unhealthy food, is not the most effective one. People are going to purchase whatever products they wish, whether the price is increased a few cents or not. Junk food options are already set at a more reasonable price than healthy foods, enticing people to buy these less expensive goods. Even though putting a tax on other products, such as tobacco, has served the intended purpose, food is a necessity humans must have for survival. Society is used to consuming foods they want, and will continue to do so. Putting a tax on unhealthy food will not necessarily lower the obesity rate because there are other factors that contribute to this problem. Moreover, taxing measures are usually intended for the collective benefit of society rather than the individual. They are usually perceived as another way the government uses to take money out of the citizens’ pockets. Ultimately, thinking that higher taxes on unhealthy foods will help curb down the obesity rate in the country would be similar to say that cost is the sole contributing factor to this public health problem. Imposing taxes will not help lower the consumption level because these foods will still have lower prices than healthier choices. Taxes do not impact the nutritional value of foods, and their only predictable effect is to help in generating additional revenue for the government.
A reason why increasing taxes on unhealthy food alone will not lower the obesity rate in the United States is the affordability and availability of junk food. Although the government keeps pushing for more healthy alternatives while taxing “fat” o...
... middle of paper ...
... food choices whether or not the “fat taxes” are imposed. In the end, due to the increasing affordability of unhealthy foods, the calorie intake and nutritional facts in each food, and the revenue created for the government, “fat taxes” will not help lower the obesity rate in the United States.
Works Cited
Brownwell, Kelly D and Thomas R. Frieden, “Ounces of Prevention- The Public Policy Case for Taxes on Sugared Beverages.” The New England Journal of Medicine 30 Apr. 2009: 1805-808.
Mankiw, N. Gregory. “Can a Soda Tax Save Us from Ourselves?” New York Times. New York Times, 5 June 2010. Web. 11 July 2011.
“McDonald’s USA Nutrition Facts for Popular Menu Items.” McDonald’s, n.d. Web 22 Nov. 2013. .
Pear, Robert. “Soft Drink Industry Fights Proposed Food Stamp Ban.” New York Times. New York Times, 29 Apr. 2011. Web. 11 July 2011.
The article,“ Battle lines drawn over soda tax,” by Associated Press , the Press explains how there is an ongoing “national fight about taxing sugary drinks.” According to Associated Press, “ Health experts say the beverages contribute to health issues such as diabetes, obesity, and tooth decay.” This quote demonstrates that sugary drinks can lead to health issues. Since sugary drinks leads to health issues, people are considering soda tax. This is because thirteen percent of adult minorities are diagnosed with diseases such as diabetes.
Drenkard, S. (2010). Overreaching on Obesity: Governments Consider New Taxes on Soda and Candy. Retrieved from http://heartland.org
Fast Foods. Health.mo.gov, 14 Sept. 2012. Web. The Web. The Web.
Mark Bittman’s article, “Taxing Sugar to Fund a city,” emphasizes that on one hand, the taxation of sugar sweetened beverages would be a bonus. On the other hand it could continue to not be supported by the people and government. Taxation of sugar sweetened beverages is being considered in many different places throughout the world. The taxation was becoming a failure everywhere, until it worked for the first time in several cities. Cites such as Northern California, San Francisco, Albany and Richmond. These cities opened up their ideas to this new type of taxation, once those places became supportive many others begin to also be supportive of this new taxation. Philadelphia plans to use the taxes received for the needy, community schools, public parks, recreation centers and libraries. Some cities support using the money this way rather than using the tax for safe free drinking water like in Berkley and Mexico. Taxed products
Obesity has become a major health issue in America. According to the Centers for Disease Control, in 1990 the majority of the fifty states had an obesity rate of 20% or lower. In 2014, all but one of the states has an obesity rate of 20% or higher. The obesity rate has been escalating, especially over the last twenty years. There is an ongoing debate over who is responsible for the rise in obesity. Radley Balko’s article “What You Eat Is Your Business,” expresses his belief that the responsibility lies with each individual, not with the government. While Yves Engler’s article “Obesity: Much of the Responsibility Lies with Corporations,” places much of the blame on corporations, he blames the government as well. Even though Balko and Engler disagree on the government’s involvement on the issue of obesity, their articles share similarities in their tone, logical writing style, and weaknesses.
The government must have a say in our diets. Because the issues of obesity have already reached national scales, because the costs of obesity and related health issues have gone far beyond reasonable limits, and because fighting nutritional issues is impossible without fighting poverty and other social issues, the government should control the range and the amount of available foods. The cost of healthier foods should decrease. The access to harmful foods should be limited. In this way, the government will be able to initiate a major shift in nutritional behaviors and attitudes in society.
Fat taxes have been experimented with in numerous European countries. There are many benefits such as boosting economic growth, improving health and elongating life expectancy. On the contrary if a fat tax is implemented into a weak economy it could cause the loss of jobs due to higher prices. These higher prices cause local consumers to begin to purchase their unhealthy products in different states or countries, causing the loss of business for local industries. France, Hungary and Denmark all have experimented with the enactment of a fat tax. All four countries experienced varied results with both positive and negative outcomes.
Obesity has become a major health concern for many and needs to be tackled head on. If unhealthy eating, resulting in obesity continues to rise then we may fall into a bigger health and economic crisis. Imposing a tax on unhealthy foods can be the first step towards creating a healthier lifestyle for all of us. By giving incentives to eat healthy and helping people who may not have had the opportunity to make the healthiest choices we will take one step closer to curing the epidemic known as
From my research on the effectiveness of the soda tax policy, I found three different arguments. The first argument supported the increased tax on sugar-sweetened beverages. These articles were written from a medical perspective, so they focused on the health benefits that could be achieved from the implementation of the tax. They believe that these excise taxes are beneficiary for both the consumers and the state as it will increase sales tax revenue, while decreasing sugary beverage consumption, which will then improve public health and fight obesity. The second group reasoned that the net effect of the excise taxes on sweetened beverages is next to zero. Their studies show that an increase in taxed beverages will decrease a consumer’s demand, which will lead them to cost-efficient substitutes that may be equally as bad for their health, therefore, there will be no gain the health department.
We can choose what kinds of food to put into our bodies, and junk food is part of our culture. For example, according to a food professional and writer of an article called, “Junk-Food Taxes Would Be Unfair and Ineffective,” Pamela Parseghian explains that, “No matter how well funds are invested for improving society, the suggestion of adding federal fat tax is ridiculous.
The definition of a fat tax is, “a specific tax placed on foods considered to be unhealthy and contribute towards obesity. A fat tax would be similar in principle to a cigarette or alcohol tax.”(economicshelp.org). Contrary to a cigarette tax though, it would be significantly more difficult to change America's eating habits by taxation or control of fatty and sugary foods.
Obesity in the US is considered an epidemic. According to the Weekly Standard, “Obesity is the new smoking.” They go on to say that “health researchers at Harvard have discovered that obesity is ‘associated’ with 112,000 deaths in the United States every year.” One way lawmakers are trying to combat the problem is by creating a soda tax. Based on the available statistics, a soda tax would be beneficial to the waistline of the average American and the health care system.
Obesity and diabetes are being diagnosed in individuals across the globe in record numbers. Today, many individuals, usually lower income individuals, cannot afford the health care required to treat these avoidable medical conditions. A tax on these sugary foods and drinks could be used to help offset the costs of those who are diagnosed with these conditions, and, ideally, prevent some of these people from developing them. Many countries have already begun including a ‘sin tax’ on sugary food and beverages in an effort to combat the epidemic. Our government should put a tax increase on these sugar filled beverages and foods as well to help reduce obesity, and raise a source of income to combat the medical issues.
A source declared, “Furthermore, critics assert, the idea that charging a few cents more for every can of soda or banning the sale of sweetened drinks over 16 ounces will reverse the growing obesity rate in the United States is laughably unrealistic” (“Diet and Obesity” par. 56). Eating habits are very important, how people control their eating habits is what causes obesity. Also, the lack of physical activity could lead to overweight problems. If the government was to control the food Americans consume, because of the fear of the United States becoming fat, there would be no promise of obesity disappearing. When people eat too much and do not exercise, that is where weight is gained. Let’s say the government put a ban on soda, in hopes of reducing the number of obese people, and companies were only allowed to sell sixteen ounce cups. Yes it may cut back on the number of people purchasing 32 ounce sodas, but who is to say that someone will not just fill up two 16 ounce cups and have 32 ounces of soda that way? If someone is that desperate, they will go to the extreme to have what they want. Obesity will never go away and the government should be focusing on more realistic