Personal and public well-being is tightly related to nourishment choices. While some people believe that the government should regulate nutrition to improve public wellness, others argue that it should be the people’s decision whether to pursue a healthy diet or not. This essay will discuss both points of view and explain why the authorities should not restrict the types of food people can buy.
Legislators could impose laws concerning nutrition subsistence and education in an effort to have a healthier and high-level population, therefore, decreasing public health costs. Even if this could be considered a good idea, it would be very quite difficult to implement. To achieve this target, the rulers could impose a levy on unhealthy sustenance options, and tuition waivers for education programs based on budget surpluses from taxation. In Italy, for example, products such as carbonated sugary drinks and chips are heavily taxed. As a result, the sales of these items have decreased. As a matter of fact, if the authorities start to take control of what their citizens can or cannot eat, it may be seen as a limitation of privilege
Since personal freedom is an extremely important human right, many people think that they should be responsible for their choices regarding the food and drinks they decide to consume. I agree with this opinion because limiting nutritional options, even if it is done with the best outcome in mind, could consequently create dissatisfaction among the population, which would possibly lead to other public issues such as protests and demonstrations. As a matter of fact, if the authorities start to take control of what their citizens can or cannot eat, it may be seen as a limitation of freedom
In conclusion, even though the government is able to control the dietary habits of its population through taxation and restrictions, healthier citizens and reduced public health expenses isn’t the only possible outcome. Limiting personal freedom could result in social unrest and for that reason diet decisions are better to be left up to well-informed individuals.
Personal and
public
well-being is
tightly
related to nourishment choices. While
some
people
believe that the
government
should regulate nutrition to
improve
public
wellness, others argue that it should be the
people’s
decision whether to pursue a healthy diet or not. This essay will discuss both points of view and
explain
why the authorities should not restrict the types of food
people
can
buy
.
Legislators could impose laws concerning nutrition subsistence and education in an effort to have a healthier and high-level population,
therefore
, decreasing
public
health costs. Even if this could
be considered
a
good
idea
, it would be
very
quite difficult to implement. To achieve this target, the rulers could impose a levy on unhealthy sustenance options, and tuition waivers for education programs based on budget surpluses from taxation. In Italy,
for example
, products such as carbonated sugary drinks and chips are
heavily
taxed.
As a result
, the sales of these items have decreased. As a matter of fact, if the authorities
start
to take control of what their citizens can or cannot eat, it may be
seen
as a limitation of
privilege
Since personal freedom is an
extremely
important
human right,
many
people
think
that they should be responsible for their choices regarding the food and drinks they decide to consume. I
agree
with this opinion
because
limiting nutritional options, even if it
is done
with the best outcome in mind, could
consequently
create dissatisfaction among the population, which would
possibly
lead to other
public
issues such as protests and demonstrations. As a matter of fact, if the authorities
start
to take control of what their citizens can or cannot eat, it may be
seen
as a limitation of
freedom
In conclusion
,
even though
the
government
is able to control the dietary habits of its population through taxation and restrictions, healthier citizens and
reduced
public
health expenses isn’t the
only
possible outcome. Limiting personal freedom could result in social unrest and for that reason diet decisions are better to be
left
up to well-informed individuals.