The growth of the fast food industry has, without doubt, impacted on the eating habits and the health of many societies around the world. Diabetes, high cholesterol, heart and respiratory problems are all on the rise due to fat and sugar-rich food. However, the question is whether the higher tax would improve this situation or not.
From an economic point of view, higher tax might seem sensible. In countries such as the USA, Australia and Britain, the health care system spends a large part of its budget on people with diet-related health problems. It could be argued that these people have caused their own illnesses because of their choice of food. In this case, why should they expect the state to pay for their treatment? The tax could help fund the health care system.
However, we also need to consider which socioeconomic group consumes fast food as the main part of their diet. Statistics indicate that lower income groups eat more of this food than wealthier people. One possible reason for this is that fast food is far cheaper than fresh produce. This is because many governments offer large subsidies to farmers who provide products for the fast food industry, such as corn, wheat and beef. Fruit and vegetables, on the other hand, are not subsidized. Research suggests that many families simply cannot afford to buy healthy food or pay higher taxes on fast food. For them, fast food is not a choice but a necessity.
In conclusion, imposing a higher tax on fast food does not seem to be the answer. If the government chose to do this, it would only lead to greater poverty and families facing further hardship.
The growth of the
fast
food
industry has, without doubt, impacted on the eating habits and the
health
of
many
societies around the world. Diabetes, high cholesterol, heart and respiratory problems are all on the rise due to
fat
and sugar-rich
food
.
However
, the question is whether the higher
tax
would
improve
this situation or not.
From an economic point of view, higher
tax
might seem sensible. In countries such as the USA, Australia and Britain, the
health
care system spends a large part of its budget on
people
with diet-related
health
problems. It could
be argued
that these
people
have caused their
own
illnesses
because
of their choice of
food
.
In this case
, why should they
expect
the state to pay for their treatment? The
tax
could
help
fund the
health
care system.
However
, we
also
need to consider which socioeconomic group consumes
fast
food
as the main part of their diet. Statistics indicate that lower income groups eat more of this
food
than wealthier
people
. One possible reason for this is that
fast
food
is far cheaper than fresh produce. This is
because
many
governments
offer large subsidies to farmers who provide products for the
fast
food
industry, such as corn, wheat and beef. Fruit and vegetables,
on the other hand
, are not subsidized. Research suggests that
many
families
simply
cannot afford to
buy
healthy
food
or pay higher
taxes
on
fast
food
. For them,
fast
food
is not a choice
but
a necessity.
In conclusion
, imposing a higher
tax
on
fast
food
does not seem to be the answer. If the
government
chose to do this, it would
only
lead to greater poverty and families facing
further
hardship.