Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Arguement essay against the fat tax
Prevention and control of obesity
The ways to prevent obesity essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Canada has a problem with obesity and a solution should be established. Junk food is easily accessible and because of this, low-income families are more likely to buy bigger quantities of it due to lower costs. Obesity can lead to diseases and serious illnesses, some of the most likely illnesses to get from obesity include Type 2 Diabetes, Uterine Cancer, and Gallbladder Disease. While these illnesses and diseases are bad, the population of people that have them can be decreased by decreasing the amount of sugary, carbonated, and high sodium foods humans consume. Junk food should be taxed because it will decrease consumption and reduce obesity rates as well as incidence of diseases, while the revenue generated by these taxes can be used to …show more content…
By adding a tax, people will stop buying unhealthy foods daily. Being able to decrease the number of unhealthy food people eat, will better our overall health, and will decline our obesity rates. A study done "as of 2003, US states without sales taxes on soft drinks or snack foods were 4 times as likely as states with a tax to have a relative increase in the prevalence of obesity" (Franck, Grandi, & Eisenberg, 2003). This is a good example of how taxing junk food will help the populations problem with obesity. With easier access to junk food, people are more likely to buy it because it is a cheap substitute for the pricey healthy …show more content…
People are going to argue that adding taxes to junk food is not going to decrease the amount of consumption, and they are going to argue there is not is not going to be any proportional change in the consumption if it is taxed. Even if “Observational data suggest that food consumption is relatively insensitive to price changes, the proportional change in consumption being less than the proportional change in price” (Mytton, Clarke, & Rayner, 2012). The argument against adding taxes to alcohol and tobacco had the same issues. However, it is suggested that “market failures for food include a failure to appreciate the true association between diet and disease, time inconsistency (preference for short term gratification over long term well-being) and not bearing the full health and social costs of consumption” (Mytton, Clarke, & Rayner,
Mark Bittman’s article “Is Junk Food Really Cheaper?” tells about how people are not really getting their money’s worth when it comes to consuming junk food. He does this by showing the differences between ordering a meal at McDonald’s and cooking a meal at home. The twenty-eight dollars that is spent to feed a family of four at McDonald’s can be put to use making a meal that could last for a couple of days and feed more than four (Bittman 660). Engineered to be addictive, hyper-processed food has a taste that makes people wanting more. Lastly, Bittman addresses the convenience of junk food provides nowadays. Therfore, the cost of junk food is not really cheaper in comparison to a home cooked meal.
Drenkard, S. (2010). Overreaching on Obesity: Governments Consider New Taxes on Soda and Candy. Retrieved from http://heartland.org
Both the risk factors and the effects of obesity are now more terrifying than any other preventable disease to both the population and the economy of Canada. In a survey of seventeen developed countries, Canada placed only tenth in life expectancy and wellbeing, while placing fourth in the highest spending on healthcare(Flood). A large factor in Canada’s state of poor well-being is obesity; obesity causes one in ten premature deaths of people aged twenty to sixty-four(Ogilvie) and is a leading cause of many life-threatening illnesses: “Obesity is recognized as a major and rapidly worsening public health problem that rivals smoking as a cause of illness and premature death. Obesity has been linked with type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, hypertension, stroke, gallbladder disease, some forms of cancer, osteoarthritis,
...d,” (Bittman). Bittman uses these statistics to show how hyperprocessed foods and sugary beverages have impacts America. Since the percentage of obese individuals continuously rises, Bittman believes that the government should step in and protect the health of individuals by establishing a new tax on junk food. People sense the urgency within Bittman’s article, since he believes it is time for the government to step in. Throughout history people have always wanted to limit the control of the government and only sought their help in dire situations; therefore, if the government is becoming involved in the weight gain problem, it must be a big problem.
Most schools have vending machines that sell various kinds of candy and chips. Some schools go as far as having school stores. However, organizations such as the FDA think this is unhealthy for students, and should be banned. Schools should be allowed to have vending machines and school stores. Having vending machines and school stores are the easiest ways for schools to get students to buy things every day. Without these, many schools would not be able to afford to continue numerous school functions. Vending machines and school stores allow students more options for what to eat for lunch. Schools should be allowed to have vending machines and school stores.
While nobody denies we have a problem with taxation in this country for food, beverages, and everything that we buy in general, I believe that we should have a fat tax to detour people from buying soda and other fattening foods. We should also ban sodas and other fattening foods from vending machines in schools, and replace them with more healthy selections.
Governments would just be continuing to cause problems because another huge problem in America is there are already way too many people without jobs. When going to the store to get a soda, is there really much to think about when drinking sweetened goods has become a part of an everyday lifestyle. Why would someone suddenly put a tax on something which so many have loved and became addicted to. If there was a tax put on everything people have come to love there would be a huge tax for everything. Bittman does not think that putting a tax on sugar sweetened beverages would affect the jobs of people because he believes it would get made up by the selling of their other products. However it is important to realize that most places would not be passing this until 2018. Although, people really do need to realize what these sweetened products are doing and the reason why taxing for these goods is not looking so
It is sad. People from all races and backgrounds are obese. In a recent survey done at Henry Ford College, 43 percent of students were overweight. Whether it is because they do not follow a healthy diet or they inherited it from their parents. Being overweight is correlated with lacking exercise or physical activity and not watching what is on the plate. Obesity can cause many illnesses, including diabetes, which is very common. As the debate whether soda tax should take effect arises, critics say that the tax will help those with obesity-related illnesses. What about exercising and maintaining a healthy lifestyle? These two factors cannot be forgotten knowing they are the most important. Americans have consumed 12 percent of soda and become less active since 1970. A soda tax aims to stop consumers from buying soda to help those who are obese. This will not be effective. Therefore a soda tax will not be good public policy.
...e surface appears to be a good idea however some individuals may argue that this would interfere with individual liberties. The best approach to find out if providing incentives works or if excise taxes works to decrease obesity is to use the cost-effectiveness analysis tool. Researchers will be able to pinpoint which policies are working and which ones are failing because cost-effectiveness is associated with cost-benefit analysis. This means if the benefits outweigh the costs, then policymakers should implement the policy with the most benefit. I believe the optimum approach to addressing the obesity epidemic is to have government incentivize individuals for maintaining a healthy Body Mass Index and to expand evidence-base school interventions. More effort should be focused on education because behaviors are learned not only in the home but also in the classroom.
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.
Everyday Americans die from the diseases they carry from obesity. Many Americans over eat because their social problems or because they are hereditary. Many plans have been discussed but finding the solution is the problem. Junk foods and unhealthy beverages have corrupted children’s minds all over the nation and putting a stop on it could lead to other benefits. Unhealthy foods and drinks should be taxed and healthy foods should be advertised more to help prevent American obesity.
According to the World Health Organization (WHO), obesity now ranks as the 10th most important health problem in the world (“Obesity Seen as a Global Problem”). Childhood obesity has more than doubled in children and tripled in adolescents in the past 30 years. Centers for Disease Control and Protection estimates that obesity contributed to the deaths of 112,000 Americans in 2000 (“Obesity in the U.S. Fast”). It is estimated that annual medical care cost of obesity are as high as $147 billion (“Obesity in the U.S. Fast”). Government-provided food stamps are often expended on junk or fast food, because it tends to be less expensive than fresh or cook food. Governments fund producers of meat and dairy products to keep prices low. For now, governments are taking a smarter and more productive approach through regulation, and by working with manufacturers.
The debate over putting restrictions on purchasing junk food continues on today. There is a limit on available fresh foods. The cost of food is a factor when determining what to buy. People get what they can in order to survive. People should be allowed to purchase junk food with food stamps.
Manitoba, a place knew for adoring new and high taxes, refused to add junk food taxes because they knew that it was going to be a waste of time and there would not be any positive results (5). The many studies of junk food taxes have soon other countries that it is not going to work. People will find other alternative to get the sugary high they need. A study in a small city showed that soda intake decreased for a small amount of time and then it increased again, as well as the sales on beer increased (Luciani P.
It became so clear that junk foods lead to a punch of catastrophic diseases like obesity, type two diabetes, vascular diseases and cardiac disorders. Those kinds of diseases cost more than $150 billion annually, just to diagnose, treat people who suffer from them. That disease is chronic and leads to many health-related issues, for example, obesity considers a risk factor for type two diabetes, and high blood pressure, joint disorders and many others (The Denver Post 2012). The key of preventing many chronic problems is nutrition. Low income plays an important role of limiting most people to buy and eat a healthy diet and in the other hand, it is easy for people budgets to purchase junk foods. So controlling the prices of healthy foods to be suitable for all people make good nutrition available for everyone. Adequate diets mean decreasing the epidemic of those serious diseases, and stopping the spread and break the bad sequences that may happen. Long-term exposure to junk foods that are full with chemicals like additives, preservatives have led to chronic illnesses difficult to treat. Also, the chemical added to junk foods are tasted unique and made millions of people becoming addicted to them and are available everywhere for example in restaurants, cafes, lunchrooms (The Denver Post