Taxation as an effective way to change American’s dieting habits
It has become universally acknowledged that our diets contain too much sugar nowadays and there is an increasingly serious problem of diseases like obesity and diabetes, there is a strong need to take more vegetables and fruits instead of unhealthy items (Bittman, 2011). However, food companies focus mainly on maximizing profits, and people just can’t resist delicious but unhealthy items. Therefore, the responsibility of helping citizens become more health-conscious and have sound diet lies with the government. This article is going to argue that taxing on unhealthy food and subsidizing vegetables may be a wise choice for policy makers.
To begin with, by taxing on unhealthy
…show more content…
The US government should, like what they did in attacking tobacco in the 1990s, tax things such as fries and sugar beverages, and subsidize staple foods that constitute healthy diets like vegetables and whole grains to make more people affordable of healthy food. In doing this, not only the overall health of Americans will be improved, but also a large portion of health care costs will be saved. The saved budget can be used for welfare facilities and health programs (Bittman, 2011). Meanwhile, many other problems, such as environmental pollution, will be addressed …show more content…
References:
Mark, B. (2011). Bad food? Tax it, and subsidize vegetables. New York Times, July 23, 2011, pp.1-6.
Oliver, M., Dushy, C., & Mike, R. (2012). Taxing unhealthy food and drinks to improve health. British Heart Foundation Health Promotion Research Group, Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK,
In 2009, a prestigious think tank in Washington, D.C. proposed a 10% tax on what they called “Fattening food of little nutritional value.” They stated that based on their study, such a tax could raise 500 billion dollars in tax revenue over 10 years, which could be put towards paying off America's ever expanding national debt (Waist). Americans spend an extremely disproportional amount of money on health care costs related to lifestyle diseases. In recent years, Americans spent $190 billion on healthcare related to obesity, which is over one-fifth of total annual healthcare spending (Baird). Because Americans would have more money to spend, a tax on fattening foods and beverages could promote economic growth for private businesses and an increase in revenue for the
Eating healthy has become a thing of the past. In the essay by Mark Bittman “Bad Food? Tax it, and Subsidize Vegetables Instead” offers an idea on how to change the Standard American Diet: making healthy food cheaper and fast, processed food more expensive. Calculating the tax to increase one penny would make a difference in the price and the decision for the people as to whether or not the people are will purchase processed foods. He explains that taxes on carbonated drinks and processed foods should increase due to the amount of money it would bring into the government, and the benefits of a healthier American. Bittman’s results remove chronic health diseases that reinvent the way we eat. In “Nickle and Dimed on Not Getting by in America,”
According to the WHO (World Health Organization) the health of the people in the United States has not always been the greatest. With an obesity rate of 33.9 percent, which translates into over 106 million obese Americans, this has caused many problems to arise and impact the daily lives of Americans. Many have tried to help in regards to this issue by improving school foods or attempting to encourage more physical activity. Unfortunately, these may have helped but only in a small scale. However, a fellow at the Union of Concerned Scientists, Mark Bittman believes that he may have a definitive solution. On May 25, 2016, in “Taxing Sugar to Fund a City” New York Times food journalist, Mark Bittman, by using the taxing of sugary beverages in Philadelphia - America’s poorest big city - earnestly
In the essay by Mark Bittman “Bad Food? Tax it, and Subsidize Vegetables Instead,” Bittman offers an idea on how to change the Standard American Diet: making healthy food cheaper and fast, processed food more expensive. Calculating the tax to increase one penny would make a difference in the price and the decision of the people as to whether or not the people will purchase processed foods. With taxes on carbonated drinks and processed foods, profits from the proposal should increase due to the amount of money it would bring into the government and the benefits of a healthier American. Bittman’s results remove chronic health diseases that reinvent the way we eat. In “Nickle and Dimed on Not Getting by in America,” Barbara Ehrenreich
Obesity is a continuing problem in the American society. Obesity, occurs when, the amount of energy taken is more than the energy released (Abraham 237). The growing obesity rates could be slightly declined by the availability of more affordable, healthier foods and the decline of these temporary quick fit diets, many Americans put themselves on as a means to get fit. The opposing viewpoint may suggest that obesity can be fixed simply by shopping for better, healthier food choices in grocery stores and learning how to count calories to maintain a healthy weight; but that simple solution may not be an achievable solution for every American. Furthermore, the difference of cost between healthy compared to unhealthy foods is completely outrageous. Numberless people strive to go into a grocery store and select all of the healthy food options of their liking; however, healthy food options cost more and are seemingly unaffordable compared to junk food. The government should regulate the prices of junk and healthy food as a means to combat obesity in America, so that all persons can achieve good health.
The government can make money by taxing unhealthy fast food and use it for education and less expensive gym memberships. If there was money invested in more education about healthy eating, young adults would have a better understanding of what is healthy. The teachers could teach the class on how to eat healthy and what kinds of healthy foods there are. The extra money could be used for a nutritionist or a chef that specializes in healthy foods. The less expensive gym memberships would mean that more people would afford to join. The nutritionist expert believes that putting in more money into school programs would increase the healthy food intake. Mark Bittman, author of Bad Food? Tax It, and Subsidize Vegetables states, “Rather than subsidizing the production of unhealthful foods, we should turn the tables and tax things like soda, French fries, doughnuts and hyperprocessed snacks” (35). Most would believe that unhealthy food should be taxed rather than healthy food. If the the government wants the people to eat healthy, then start taxing the unhealthy food, so the healthy food is cheaper. A hamburger cost $1 and a salad costs about $5. Which one would the people want to buy? The hamburger because it is cheaper and delicious. The salad may be healthier, but the hamburger is way cheaper. A study has shown that a penny-per-ounce tax on unhealthy food would generate about billions of dollars in income and it
Who has not eaten junk food at least once? I did it, and to me, as to many Americans, the junk food is the most delicious type of food. However, I know it is the unhealthiest food and the main cause of obesity in the United States. On the other hand, the U.S. government feels that is important to intervene in junk food lover’s lives to help them to improve their health and their food choices. In order to combat the obesity and other health problems that junk food causes, the U.S. government has been looking for many ways to prevent and decrease the number of obese people in the country. They believe that adding taxes to the junk food is a great idea that might help people to
The main conflict in "Bad Food? Tax It, and Subsidize Vegetables“ concerns the change of average Americans poor diet through economic encouragement. Mark Bittman's idea to put a high tax on unhealthy foods such as cookies, potato chips, french fries and soft drinks in order to subsidize healthy foods like vegetables is a great idea. As he points out, "A 20 percent increase in the price of sugary drinks nationally could result in about a 20 percent decrease in consumption, which in the next decade could prevent 1.5 million Americans from becoming obese and 400,000 cases of diabetes, saving about $30 billion." This is why I’m fully on board with the program Bittman outlines because such a program can save people's health and the well-being of
For this reason, I believe there is great need to campaign for new legislation and social programming that addresses the following supportive evidence for obesity resolution. According to Frieden, Dietz, and Collins, implementing legislation that heavily taxes unhealthy food will help reduce consumption of these foods. Decreasing the cost of healthy foods, subsidizing farmer’s markets in underprivileged areas, creating zoning legislation that prohibits the building of fast food restaurants in the vicinity of schools and recreation areas, prohibition of unhealthy food advertisements directed at children, requiring restaurants to offer healthy food options for kids with the nutritional information listed on the menu, increase active transportation and recreation, and improve physical activity programs will also reduce childhood obesity (Frieden, Dietz, & Collins, 2010). The difficulty in implementing these solutions is monetary and political. The businesses negatively affected by these changes will fight against them and the cost of subsidizing groceries for the impoverished areas will cost.
Contemporary debates regarding the increase of obesity are dominated by a personal responsibility frame. However, the most impacting factor for obesity in the United States is income. With farm subsidies, the price of soft drinks decreased by 23% between 1985 and 2000, meanwhile the cost of fruits and vegetables increased by 40% (SG5 Lecture Notes, 11/8/16). Based off the Bureau of Labor Statistics the cost of unhealthy foods has dramatically fallen while the price of fruits and vegetables has inflated.
In Mark Bittman’s article “Bad Food? Tax it, and Subsidize Vegetables, his motive is to stop American people eating unhealthy food, and he wants people to start eating healthy food and live a healthier life style. Also, he wants government to put taxes on unhealthy food, and subsidies with vegetables instead. Therefore, people will stop buying unhealthy food. Not only it will save people’s life, it can also lower down the cost of healthcare. The audience for this article seems to be the people in the U.S who eat unhealthy food, who are in unhealthy food marketing industry, and government, because he mentions that he wants government to put a tax on sodas, fries, and etc. Also, he states that food industries just want to make more profit, and
Eating unhealthy foods is one of the major causes of obesity today; but should there be a higher tax on all soft drinks and junk food? Should people be punished for eating what they want? Yes, there are health risks involved with an unhealthy diet but is a higher taxing on these foods the right alternative? With the price of healthcare raising maybe the extra tax could help alleviate it, maybe not. Perhaps the higher tax will turn people away from buying unhealthy foods and drinks. Consuming unwholesome food can lead to clogged arteries, heart attacks and many other fatal illnesses. Buying the healthier substitute may help our
With a growing epidemic of obesity in America, some states and lawmakers have resorted to taking unconventional measures in order to counter the growing issue. Many legislators are debating the effectiveness of a “fat tax” would be on limiting the consumption of soda, high fat foods, and high sugar foods, and ultimately reducing the rate of morbidity and mortality due to obesity. The idea is that long term consumption of high fat, high sugar foods and drinks lead to many health problems, so making them more expensive and less accessible should decrease the health issues related to their consumption.
There are better alternatives for preventing obesity than a fat tax. The policy-improving RAND Corporation examined twenty international programs which offered subsidies for fruit and vegetables. Study author Ruopeng An wrote: “All but
Society must educate itself on what type of food is healthy such as fresh or fresh frozen vegetables, lean meats, whole grains and fruits. Parents should take the time to explain what these are and why they are important, educating themselves if necessary. Families can also extend this education to a hands-on experience but starting a small vegetable garden which produces some of the vegetables they eat. Author and farmer, Sharon Astyk, and sustainable systems land planner, Aaron Newton, argue that people need to take back the control of the food selection and prices by growing their own or purchasing directly from local farmers. In their article, “The Rich Get Richer: the Poor Go Hungry”, Astyk and Newton (2015) write, “When we grow our own food, or buy it directly from local farmers, we take power away from multinationals” (p.518). I agree that society should become more involved and self-sustaining pertaining to food to retain independence from companies that are loyal to shareholders. This education will provide the current and future generations necessary resources to make improved food choices, thereby reducing the obesity and diabetes epidemics gripping our nation.