The extreme consumption of fast food has been a thorny issue making more and more folks bear with health diseases over years in numerous regions. Although it is thought that imposing a higher tax on junk food is crucial for authorities, I am particularly against the idea.
On the one hand, there are many advantages for governments to raise the fast-food tax. Due to high expenses, inhabitants are less likely to consume junk food frequently. Boosting taxes discourage citizens to purchase convenience food, therefore, they have no option but neither buying healthy food not cooking a proper meal to save their money. Furthermore, the amount of money derived from charging junk food could be used to minimize the negative impact caused by absorbing excessive ready-to-go food. For instance, the authorities can use the expenditure in hospitality to help patients who are coping with diseases such as obesity and heart disease.
On the other hand, assessing hunger tax is needless as people might maintain a fast-food diet. Firstly, the middle and lower-income class would be affected by the extra fee while the affluent residents are immune. Secondly, knowing the detriment effect of fast food, many people still take up ready-to-go meals owing to its convenience. According to some news, the former US president, Donald Trump, usually eats one McDonald's meal a day to save time for working. Perhaps a feasible approach for the government is to make healthy food more affordable and accessible to their dwellers.
In conclusion, I strongly disapprove of enhancing the tax on fast food to reduce health issues despite the benefits of that idea. Hence, better attempts should be used to tackle the problem.
The extreme consumption of
fast
food
has been a thorny issue making more and more folks bear with health diseases over years in numerous regions. Although it is
thought
that imposing a higher
tax
on junk
food
is crucial for authorities, I am
particularly
against the
idea
.
On the one hand, there are
many
advantages for
governments
to raise the
fast
-food
tax
. Due to high expenses, inhabitants are less likely to consume junk
food
frequently
. Boosting
taxes
discourage citizens to
purchase
convenience
food
,
therefore
, they have no option
but
neither buying healthy
food
not cooking a proper meal to save their money.
Furthermore
, the amount of money derived from charging junk
food
could be
used
to minimize the
negative
impact caused by absorbing excessive ready-to-go
food
.
For instance
, the authorities can
use
the expenditure in hospitality to
help
patients who are coping with diseases such as obesity and heart disease.
On the other hand
, assessing hunger
tax
is needless as
people
might maintain a
fast
-food diet.
Firstly
, the middle and lower-income
class
would be
affected
by the extra fee while the affluent residents are immune.
Secondly
, knowing the detriment effect of
fast
food
,
many
people
still
take up ready-to-go meals owing to its convenience. According to
some
news, the former US president, Donald Trump,
usually
eats one McDonald's meal a day to save time for working. Perhaps a feasible approach for the
government
is to
make
healthy
food
more affordable and accessible to their dwellers.
In conclusion
, I
strongly
disapprove of enhancing the
tax
on
fast
food
to
reduce
health issues despite the benefits of that
idea
.
Hence
, better attempts should be
used
to tackle the problem.