Government Interventions
A food desert is a low-income community that has little to no access to a nearby super market. It is very common for these communities to have easier access to junk food, simply because it is cheaper. Unhealthy eating habits raise the risks of developing a chronic disease in your life. A chronic disease is a disease that, once you develop, you will have for the rest of your life. An example of a chronic disease is diabetes, which is common to develop if you eat a lot of junk food. Chronic diseases are an epidemic in the United States, and like the Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD) states, it is hurting business when the employees and employers get chronically ill. This is the point when the government should …show more content…
The idea behind it is raising taxes on junk food such as, soda and chips, is that people will be more reluctant to buy it. If it’s harder for them to purchase healthy food because it is more expensive, then they won’t want to buy junk if it is more expensive plus unhealthy. In the CARDIA study, it was shown that after taxes were imposed they saw a dramatic decrease in the consumption of soda and pizza. Another solution proposed was, having grocery and supermarket store employees guide SNAP beneficiaries and show them healthy options. It was also suggested that they reward the beneficiaries when they go with the healthy options. The Let’s Move campaign suggests getting more people enrolled in SNAP. They also suggest establishing a food policy control, and regulating what gets purchased with food stamps. If they are going to increase funds like it was suggested then they definitely should regulate what gets purchased with the government’s money. Some people just take advantage of the funding and blow 300 dollars on microwave food. Someone who disagreed with this approach might say that they do not want the government involved in their lives as much. They may not want to pay a higher tax on junk food. They might argue what qualifies as junk food and what doesn’t. They may also argue about where that tax money is going. Someone against this approach may also not want funds increased because it will add to the deficit. The main point arguable is that it would cost a lot of money and change many people’s lifestyle, which they have the freedom to
A food desert is a low-income community that has little to no access to a nearby super market. It is very common for these communities to have easier access to junk food, simply because it is cheaper. Unhealthy eating habits raise the risks of developing a chronic disease in your life. A chronic disease is a disease that, once you develop, you will have for the rest of your life. An example of a chronic disease is diabetes, which is common to develop if you eat a lot of junk food. Chronic diseases are an epidemic in the United States, and like the Partnership to Fight Chronic Disease (PFCD) states, it is hurting business when the employees and employers get chronically ill. This is the point when the government should …show more content…
The idea behind it is raising taxes on junk food such as, soda and chips, is that people will be more reluctant to buy it. If it’s harder for them to purchase healthy food because it is more expensive, then they won’t want to buy junk if it is more expensive plus unhealthy. In the CARDIA study, it was shown that after taxes were imposed they saw a dramatic decrease in the consumption of soda and pizza. Another solution proposed was, having grocery and supermarket store employees guide SNAP beneficiaries and show them healthy options. It was also suggested that they reward the beneficiaries when they go with the healthy options. The Let’s Move campaign suggests getting more people enrolled in SNAP. They also suggest establishing a food policy control, and regulating what gets purchased with food stamps. If they are going to increase funds like it was suggested then they definitely should regulate what gets purchased with the government’s money. Some people just take advantage of the funding and blow 300 dollars on microwave food. Someone who disagreed with this approach might say that they do not want the government involved in their lives as much. They may not want to pay a higher tax on junk food. They might argue what qualifies as junk food and what doesn’t. They may also argue about where that tax money is going. Someone against this approach may also not want funds increased because it will add to the deficit. The main point arguable is that it would cost a lot of money and change many people’s lifestyle, which they have the freedom to