The reading and the article are both contradict each other, in terms of putting high taxes on cigarettes and other unhealthy products. More specifically, the writer discusses that imposing high taxes on smoking products and unhealthy commodities would create numerous advantages. However, the lecturer casts doubt about the mentioned hypothesis in the reading and provides some evidence to refute them.
According to the article, the first dispute focuses on that imposing higher taxes on unhealthy food products and cigarettes demotivate people to consume those products. Nonetheless, the speaker refutes this argument and declares that high taxes would force people to buy low-quality cigarettes and unhealthy food which may cause severe health problems to them. Thus, this solution is not practical.
Moreover, another passage highlights that the idea of higher taxes is fair since unhealthy activities will cause more medical costs for society. Nevertheless, the narrator refutes this asserting that these taxes are unfair for people who are earning a low income. Furthermore, higher taxes would put much more burden on lower income people compared to rich people. Hence, this solution is not acceptable.
Finally, the text explains that the economic benefits of imposing high taxes could help the government to perform social projects such as building sports centers, public gardens, and many more. On the contrary, the penman opposes the theory and describes that higher taxes bring a vast amount of money to the government. Thereby, the government might become dependent on such income and indirectly encourage people to smoke in public areas and private area which will help the government to make more revenue.
The reading and the article are both contradict each other, in terms of putting
high
taxes
on cigarettes and other
unhealthy
products
. More
specifically
, the writer discusses that imposing
high
taxes
on smoking
products
and
unhealthy
commodities would create numerous advantages.
However
, the lecturer casts doubt about the mentioned hypothesis in the reading and provides
some
evidence to refute them.
According to the article, the
first
dispute focuses on that imposing higher
taxes
on
unhealthy
food
products
and cigarettes demotivate
people
to consume those
products
. Nonetheless, the speaker refutes this argument and declares that
high
taxes
would force
people
to
buy
low-quality cigarettes and
unhealthy
food which may cause severe health problems to them.
Thus
, this solution is not practical.
Moreover
, another passage highlights that the
idea
of higher
taxes
is
fair
since
unhealthy
activities will cause more medical costs for society.
Nevertheless
, the narrator refutes this asserting that these
taxes
are unfair for
people
who are earning a low income.
Furthermore
, higher
taxes
would put much more burden on lower income
people
compared to rich
people
.
Hence
, this solution is not acceptable.
Finally
, the text
explains
that the economic benefits of imposing
high
taxes
could
help
the
government
to perform social projects such as building sports centers, public gardens, and
many
more.
On the contrary
, the penman opposes the theory and
describes
that higher
taxes
bring a vast amount of money to the
government
. Thereby, the
government
might become dependent on such income and
indirectly
encourage
people
to smoke in public areas and private area which will
help
the
government
to
make
more revenue.