According to the reading section, taxing people who engage in unhealthy behaviors, such as smokers and those who consume unhealthy products, can benefit society for some reason. The lecturer, however, challenges all of the reasons provided in the reading part.
First, the article asserts that taxes can discourage people from continuing their unhealthy behaviors. In contrast, the professor believes that imposing taxes does not necessarily lead to healthier behaviors. For example, suppose the government increases the price of cigarettes by imposing taxes. In that case, smokers might decide to buy cheaper cigarettes that cause greater health problems. Similarly, suppose governments increase the price of unhealthy food. In that case, people who eat junk food may spend most of their money on buying them, and therefore, they may not have enough money to buy healthier food.
Second, the writer of the reading section believes that these kinds of taxes are fair because they compensate for the extra medical costs caused by smokers or people who eat junk food and get sick because of their unhealthy behaviors. However, the lecturer believes that such taxes might be unfair because people are not equal in terms of their incomes. Consequently, if all people pay the same amount of taxes, much burden would be on the shoulders of people with smaller incomes.
Third, the article asserts that such taxes can be beneficial for everyone since they can increase the revenue for the government. On the other hand, the professor holds an opposite view because these taxes have some downsides. By increasing the taxes for unhealthy behaviors, the government may become dependent on this extra income, and consequently, it might be reluctant to enforce laws and policies that eliminate or decrease the rate of unhealthy behaviors. For example, the government may be unlikely to adopt radical measures such as banning smoking in outdoor areas (e. g. , parks) because it does not want to lose the income from taxes related to smoking.
According to the reading section, taxing
people
who
engage in
unhealthy
behaviors
, such as smokers and those
who
consume
unhealthy
products, can benefit society for
some
reason. The lecturer,
however
, challenges
all of the
reasons provided in the reading part.
First
, the article asserts that
taxes
can discourage
people
from continuing their
unhealthy
behaviors
.
In contrast
, the professor believes that imposing
taxes
does not
necessarily
lead to healthier
behaviors
.
For example
, suppose the
government
increases the price of cigarettes by imposing
taxes
.
In that case
, smokers might decide to
buy
cheaper cigarettes that cause greater health problems.
Similarly
, suppose
governments
increase the price of
unhealthy
food.
In that case
,
people
who
eat junk food may spend most of their money on buying them, and
therefore
, they may not have
enough
money to
buy
healthier food.
Second, the writer of the reading section believes that these kinds of
taxes
are
fair
because
they compensate for the extra medical costs caused by smokers or
people
who
eat junk food and
get
sick
because
of their
unhealthy
behaviors
.
However
, the lecturer believes that such
taxes
might be unfair
because
people
are not equal in terms of their incomes.
Consequently
, if all
people
pay the same amount of
taxes
, much burden would be on the shoulders of
people
with smaller incomes.
Third, the article asserts that such
taxes
can be beneficial for everyone since they can increase the revenue for the
government
.
On the other hand
, the professor holds an opposite view
because
these
taxes
have
some
downsides. By increasing the
taxes
for
unhealthy
behaviors
, the
government
may become dependent on this extra income, and
consequently
, it might be reluctant to enforce laws and policies that eliminate or decrease the rate of
unhealthy
behaviors
.
For example
, the
government
may be unlikely to adopt radical measures such as banning smoking in outdoor areas (
e. g.
,
parks)
because
it does not want to lose the income from
taxes
related to smoking.