Essay on Why Junk Food Should Be Taxed

“ We have become a fast food Nation of bulging waistlines and high blood pressures.”,said Ronnie Cummins in his article, “ Tax on Junk Food Can Help Pay the Costs of Diet-Related Diseases.” Diet related obesity,diabetes and heart diseases are now USA’s number 1 public health problems because of non-healthy foods,this is why there should be a tax on junk food,why we should serve healthier lunches in school cafeterias ,and why we should restrict advertisements of junk foods in the mass media.Would taxing junk food ,eating healthier ,and restricting junk food advertisements be so bad if you thought about how many people it could save?

An additional tax on junk food would lead to high cost of production and prices thus reducing the overall output and

With obesity rates increasing at an exponential rate, a tax on fat foods and specifically high sugar beverages of 20% or about 1 cent per ounce could reduce obesity rates by 3.5%, bringing the rate down to 30% among adults (Kalaidis). While 3.5% may not sound like a lot, if you take an approximate U.S. population of 350 million people, suddenly that mere 3.5% turns into over 12 million Americans who would no longer be considered obese. Marion Nestle, a well-respected expert in food policy, recently conducted a study investigating the impact of a junk food tax through predictive modeling. Her study revealed that 2,600 deaths, 9,500 heart attacks, and 240,000 new cases of diabetes could be prevented with a simple 1 cent per ounce tax on sugary beverages (Satran). A junk food tax of this kind could greatly increase the health of the American public as a whole by reducing death rates and healthcare

The government can make money by taxing unhealthy fast food and use it for education and less expensive gym memberships. If there was money invested in more education about healthy eating, young adults would have a better understanding of what is healthy. The teachers could teach the class on how to eat healthy and what kinds of healthy foods there are. The extra money could be used for a nutritionist or a chef that specializes in healthy foods. The less expensive gym memberships would mean that more people would afford to join. The nutritionist expert believes that putting in more money into school programs would increase the healthy food intake. Mark Bittman, author of Bad Food? Tax It, and Subsidize Vegetables states, “Rather than subsidizing the production of unhealthful foods, we should turn the tables and tax things like soda, French fries, doughnuts and hyperprocessed snacks” (35). Most would believe that unhealthy food should be taxed rather than healthy food. If the the government wants the people to eat healthy, then start taxing the unhealthy food, so the healthy food is cheaper. A hamburger cost $1 and a salad costs about $5. Which one would the people want to buy? The hamburger because it is cheaper and delicious. The salad may be healthier, but the hamburger is way cheaper. A study has shown that a penny-per-ounce tax on unhealthy food would generate about billions of dollars in income and it

A bag of potato chips, for example, contains 10 grams of fat, 170 grams of sodium, and only 2 grams of protein. A whole pineapple, on the other hand, has 1.1 grams of fat, 9 milligrams of sodium, and about 5 grams of protein. The chips have about 10 times the fat, 18,889 times the sodium, and about half as much protein as the pineapple. Which is healthier? The pineapple, it is a no-brainer, right? Actually, 66.7 percent of the 18 people surveyed in a private poll would rather choose a $5.00 pineapple over a $2.50 bag of potato chips. Therefore, it would be smarter to raise the tax on junk foods, just like the government raised the tax on cigarettes. “Significant increases in tobacco taxes are a highly effective tobacco control strategy and lead to significant improvements in public health,” according to Chuck Marr and Chye-Ching Huang, authors for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Meaning, raising the tax on fatty foods would encourage people to choose healthier options, limiting the amount of junk food consumption. Just like increased taxes on cigarettes decreased the amount of smokers. Both are bad for you, so it would make sense. So, by increasing the tax, people would be even more inclined to purchase healthier

The government should control the American peoples’ diet. Poor diet choices result in increased health care costs which affects every tax payer in America. Poor diet contributes to obesity which results in an increase in a plethora of diseases. The cost of these diseases has a huge economic impact on the country. The government owes it to its citizens to control these costs through diet regulation. It also owes its citizens the opportunity for optimal health.

That has gone without, including paying for breakfast to be held in schools as kids won’t be getting a decent breakfast at home because their parents and guardians would have to pay more for the food that they want. However, I personally don’t agree with this statement, from my perspective, putting a tax on junk food won’t necessarily eradicate the obesity and type 2 diabetes epidemics from overconsuming junk foods, but it will reduce the consumption by a certain amount, however it’s something that’s not going to happen overnight. This is similar to smoking in the sense that smoking is taxed because it’s pernicious not only to the person concerned, but the society around them and even though smoking is taxed, people are still prepared to buy cigarettes at a ridiculously expensive price so they can still smoke, but the number of people that smoke has decreased by a reasonable amount. Therefore if the government puts a tax on junk food it will have a corresponding effect as to how smoking was taxed.

Many children of today are faced with the undeniable issue of obesity and other severe health conditions rooted from unhealthy eating habits and lack of exercise. When analyzing children from the mid 1970’s to now a significant increase in child obesity can be detected. This statement conjures the question who is responsible for what children are consuming and the opportunities that are made available for them. Instinctively humans are given free will to make choices for themselves; however, at a young age parents are the one’s who are making the decisions. Many adults are appealed by cheap, fast, and accessible which perfectly describes junk food. Given the choice of a healthy dinner or a pizza, when comparing prices, majority of people would choose the latter of the two. In terms of aiding this obesity epidemic the government also needs to step up in supporting the community both financially and socially. The government has access to a wide range of resources that can contribute to inflating the

First of all, a junk food tax needs to be placed to end the obesity and diabetes epidemic. For example, too many people are suffering from diabetes, but CEOs of companies like Lay’s and Pepsi don’t really care. According to Authority Nutrition,

Taxing junk food will assist in the rising health problems in the United States. Obesity is a growing problem, if the government created a junk food tax, it would help reduce obesity. In the article “Junk Food Tax Could Improve Health” by Kristina Fiore, it says that if junk food had an eighteen percent tax than it would “result in a 56-calorie decline … that would translate to about five pounds per patient per year” (Fiore 1). This is an example of two benefits gained from taxing junk food. First, the eighteen percent tax that is collected would help support health care issues and second people would buy less junk food due to the rising costs. When consumers buy less junk food, they consume less, which will reduce the obesity rate.

One of the biggest health care breakthrough was when the government had decided to impose tax on cigarettes. One article statistics show that “every 10 percent price increase on cigarettes reduced sales by about three percent overall, and seven percent among teenagers” (Kristof, Nicholas). People chose to smoke less because cigarettes became less affordable, which led to decrease in cases of lung cancer. Just like cigarettes, processed food is related to health problems. Applying the tax on it is the next logical step. Higher prices on junk food will discourage people from purchasing it, which will promote healthier

Paying taxes is something everyone does. We pay taxes on cars, property, and on our income. What about the junk food we consume? This has been debated for years that it will or will not work. How do we educate the public? Why should we do it? Where will the money be going? What groups will it serve? Prices are already high, so where is the money coming from? Everything that is done must be motivated because if not, it becomes a fad - here today and gone tomorrow. Only things that are done repetitively are made into habits. As a person, all things can be done if we have a desire and a need. Taxes on junk food and soda will not work unless everyone is educated on the utilization of revenues, health advantages, and motivated sufficiently to make a more healthy change.

Raising food taxes is the topic of the editorial article “Slapping a tax on junk food is still a bad idea” by the Globe and Mail. The writer states that raising taxes is not the answer to decrease high obesity rates and instead suggests that moderation and lifestyle are key to enjoying food. The editorial also acknowledges the increasing amount of attention we give to this problem now that it has grown larger and more complex. Also, an increase of taxes ultimately allow the consumers to have the last say in what they consume. The writer argues that an increase of taxes on junk foods is not necessary for society; my research will focus on whether this is true or not.

Junk food has been getting a bad rap recently in society. It is believed that junk food is a leading factor in childhood obesity and should not be allowed in public schools. Due to this many school systems have enacted bans, or strict regulations that limit or completely exclude junk food in schools. Junk food should not be banned in schools because schools profit and are able to fund education and extracurricular activities through selling it, junk food isn’t as harmful as one would think, and even if schools ban junk food students can still be at risk of obesity through the use of outside sources.

That have gone without, including paying for breakfast to be held in schools as kids won’t be getting a decent breakfast at home because their parents and guardians would be having to pay more for the food that they want. However, I personally don’t agree with this statement, putting a tax on junk food won’t necessarily eradicate the obesity and type 2 diabetes epidemic from overconsuming junk foods, but it will reduce the consumption by a certain amount, however it’s something that’s not going to happen overnight. This is similar to smoking in the sense that smoking is taxed because it’s pernicious not only to the person concerned, but the society around them and even though smoking is taxed, people are still prepared to buy cigarettes at a ridiculously expensive price so they can still smoke, but the number of people that smoke has decreased by a reasonable amount. Research….. Therefore if the government puts a tax on junk food it will have a corresponding effect as to how smoking was taxed.