The material discusses the concept of imposing high taxes on cigarettes and other unhealthy behaviors. While the reading states many social benefits for this approach, the listening challenges all these benefits.
First, the author mentions that these taxes can discourage people from unhealthy behaviors. On the other hand, the professor opposes this and mentions that these taxes could lead people to but cheaper or low-quality cigarettes. The lecturer adds that these cheaper cigarettes have more harmful substances than quality cigarettes, so they may pose greater health risks. In addition to that, the speaker adds that people could continue to buy unhealthy food, even it has high taxes. The lecturer explains that if people spend more money on this unhealthy food, they may have less money left to buy healthy food.
Second, the author claims that implementing high taxes for unhealthy products is financially fair. On the contrary, the lecturer refutes this and mentions that governments should take incomes into consideration. The professor explains that low- income families could suffer, while high-income ones would be ok. The speaker posits that taxes could are a much greater burden of low-income families.
Third, the reading contends that these taxes would increase governments' revenue. Conversely, the professor contradicts this and claims that these revenues could have a downside. The lecturer explains that governments will depend on this money, so they do not pay attention to limit these unhealthy behaviors. Moreover, the speaker adds that governments will adapt to it and do not put banning rules to stop people from smoking in public areas. The professor states that because governments do not want to lose this income.
The material discusses the concept of imposing high
taxes
on
cigarettes
and other
unhealthy
behaviors. While the reading states
many
social benefits for this approach, the listening challenges all these benefits.
First
, the author mentions that these
taxes
can discourage
people
from
unhealthy
behaviors.
On the other hand
, the
professor
opposes this and mentions that these
taxes
could lead
people
to
but
cheaper or low-quality
cigarettes
. The
lecturer
adds
that these cheaper
cigarettes
have more harmful substances than quality
cigarettes
,
so
they may pose greater health
risks
.
In addition
to that, the speaker
adds
that
people
could continue to
buy
unhealthy
food, even it has high
taxes
. The
lecturer
explains
that if
people
spend more money on this
unhealthy
food, they may have less money
left
to
buy
healthy food.
Second, the author claims that implementing high
taxes
for
unhealthy
products is
financially
fair
.
On the contrary
, the
lecturer
refutes this and mentions that
governments
should take incomes into consideration. The
professor
explains
that low- income families could suffer, while high-income ones would be ok. The speaker posits that
taxes
could are a much greater burden of low-income families.
Third, the reading contends that these
taxes
would increase
governments
' revenue.
Conversely
, the
professor
contradicts this and claims that these revenues could have a downside. The
lecturer
explains
that
governments
will depend on this money,
so
they do not pay attention to limit these
unhealthy
behaviors.
Moreover
, the speaker
adds
that
governments
will adapt to it and do not put banning
rules
to
stop
people
from smoking in public areas. The
professor
states that
because
governments
do not want to lose this income.