The article “Bad Food? Tax It, and Subsidize Vegetables” was written by Mark Bittman in an opinion section of the New York times. Food that has negative or no health benefits are to be taxed so foods that are healthier are cheaper and more available to all people. I believe eating unhealthy food is an addiction and should not be taxed because people cannot control themselves.
Tax the unhealthy food to make the healthy food cheaper. The taxation of unhealthy foods would produce billions of dollars for the government to spend on healthier alternatives. Although the processed food industry will suffer and some will complain about the higher tax it does not matter because public health is the government's responsibility. The subsidization would …show more content…
The resulting income should be earmarked for a program that encourages a sound diet for Americans by making healthy food more affordable and widely available” (Bittman). Although the author has a good point because yes you could tax unhealthy food but in reality it has one fatal flaw. Taxing food because you do not want people to consume it is unconstitutional. People are free to eat whatever they want. Americans are not known for liking high taxation especially when it come to what they eat. This taxation of sugary or unhealthy foods would be seen as un American. The author did not convince me because although he had some pretty eye opening statistics I still believe the american people should have the freedom to eat whatever food they so …show more content…
But unhealthy food with preservatives are readily available at all times “On top of this, salt and sugar are the most popular preservatives. That means food can wait around until you get ready to eat it, unlike a banana or an apple slice”(Thomas). Another flaw with Bittman's argument is that he ignores the shelf life of fresh produce. I believe thomas has a point when he he talks about how long a banana lasts compared to chips or another snack. Preservative although bad for one's health are readily available and accessible.
Regardless of taxation people will steal eat junk food “Junk food’ taxes are also not guaranteed to reduce overall caloric intake, as some hope. Importantly, fast food consumption (a common target for a "fat tax") may be relatively unresponsive to price changes because individuals may simply switch to other non-taxed, but still energy-dense (lots of calories per serving size) foods”(Esmail)Considering that most desserts are unhealthy it would most likely be taxed. People should not be taxed to attempt to curb the obesity epidemic because healthy people occasionally eat junk food. It is all about moderation not taxation.
Bittman definitely makes some valid points and gives a real solution to the obesity epidemic but his plan would never work. People have a choice as to what food they put into their bodies whether they are healthy or unhealthy, rich or poor. As human beings
Tax the unhealthy food to make the healthy food cheaper. The taxation of unhealthy foods would produce billions of dollars for the government to spend on healthier alternatives. Although the processed food industry will suffer and some will complain about the higher tax it does not matter because public health is the government's responsibility. The subsidization would …show more content…
The resulting income should be earmarked for a program that encourages a sound diet for Americans by making healthy food more affordable and widely available” (Bittman). Although the author has a good point because yes you could tax unhealthy food but in reality it has one fatal flaw. Taxing food because you do not want people to consume it is unconstitutional. People are free to eat whatever they want. Americans are not known for liking high taxation especially when it come to what they eat. This taxation of sugary or unhealthy foods would be seen as un American. The author did not convince me because although he had some pretty eye opening statistics I still believe the american people should have the freedom to eat whatever food they so …show more content…
But unhealthy food with preservatives are readily available at all times “On top of this, salt and sugar are the most popular preservatives. That means food can wait around until you get ready to eat it, unlike a banana or an apple slice”(Thomas). Another flaw with Bittman's argument is that he ignores the shelf life of fresh produce. I believe thomas has a point when he he talks about how long a banana lasts compared to chips or another snack. Preservative although bad for one's health are readily available and accessible.
Regardless of taxation people will steal eat junk food “Junk food’ taxes are also not guaranteed to reduce overall caloric intake, as some hope. Importantly, fast food consumption (a common target for a "fat tax") may be relatively unresponsive to price changes because individuals may simply switch to other non-taxed, but still energy-dense (lots of calories per serving size) foods”(Esmail)Considering that most desserts are unhealthy it would most likely be taxed. People should not be taxed to attempt to curb the obesity epidemic because healthy people occasionally eat junk food. It is all about moderation not taxation.
Bittman definitely makes some valid points and gives a real solution to the obesity epidemic but his plan would never work. People have a choice as to what food they put into their bodies whether they are healthy or unhealthy, rich or poor. As human beings