Essay on Why Junk Food Should Be Taxed

With obesity rates increasing at an exponential rate, a tax on fat foods and specifically high sugar beverages of 20% or about 1 cent per ounce could reduce obesity rates by 3.5%, bringing the rate down to 30% among adults (Kalaidis). While 3.5% may not sound like a lot, if you take an approximate U.S. population of 350 million people, suddenly that mere 3.5% turns into over 12 million Americans who would no longer be considered obese. Marion Nestle, a well-respected expert in food policy, recently conducted a study investigating the impact of a junk food tax through predictive modeling. Her study revealed that 2,600 deaths, 9,500 heart attacks, and 240,000 new cases of diabetes could be prevented with a simple 1 cent per ounce tax on sugary beverages (Satran). A junk food tax of this kind could greatly increase the health of the American public as a whole by reducing death rates and healthcare

Many children of today are faced with the undeniable issue of obesity and other severe health conditions rooted from unhealthy eating habits and lack of exercise. When analyzing children from the mid 1970’s to now a significant increase in child obesity can be detected. This statement conjures the question who is responsible for what children are consuming and the opportunities that are made available for them. Instinctively humans are given free will to make choices for themselves; however, at a young age parents are the one’s who are making the decisions. Many adults are appealed by cheap, fast, and accessible which perfectly describes junk food. Given the choice of a healthy dinner or a pizza, when comparing prices, majority of people would choose the latter of the two. In terms of aiding this obesity epidemic the government also needs to step up in supporting the community both financially and socially. The government has access to a wide range of resources that can contribute to inflating the

Taxing junk food isn’t as bad as people may think. “ In 1972, U.S consumers spent $3 billion a year on fast food; today we spend more than $110 billion.”, said Cummins . If only we put a tax on junk foods this number would go up and the tax money could be used for all of the collateral damages it causes. Another reason why taxing junk food isn’t as bad as people may think is because “ junk food kills”, stated Cummins. The junk food industry is in a similar position that the tobacco industry was once. After many decades the truth is finally becoming crystal clear.

Eating too much junk food is a problem for many Americans. Currently, 9.3 percent are diabetic, while 35.7 percent of Americans are obese ("Statistics About Diabetes") ("Overweight and Obesity Statistics"). Even more Americans could become diabetic in the future because obesity is known to cause it. “If Americans keep getting heavier at the current rate, 42% of the population will be obese by 2030,” according to Alexandra Sifferlin, in a TIME article. The government should raise taxes on candy and other fatty snacks to help decrease obesity and the number of diabetic people. Decreasing these two health problems would lessen the amount of money needed for health insurance. In addition, willpower is an issue for many people and if a bag of potato

In a society where diseases such as diabetes and obesity are pervasive, action must be taken to combat the diseases. In Canada, Statistic Canada found that almost a third of Canadians aged 5 to 17 is overweight or obese. According to the World Health Organization standards of measurement, 31.5% of 5 to 17 year old Canadians are classified as overweight or obese from 2009 to 2011. With the high rates of obesity in Canadian children, which many affect their quality of life in the future as many diseases will develop as an adult. Canadian doctors attribute to the fact that the food industry has made it easy for Canadians to gain calories. The Canadian government must impose a junk food tax to make sure that accessing junk food and gaining calories will be more difficult. With the junk food tax, the Canadian government will increase tax revenues, Canadians will be able to change their lifestyles and the risk of Canadians having diseases such as obesity and diabetes will be dramatically decreased.

In America’s present economic state, citizens are looking for one thing: convenience. The American lifestyle has evolved into a quick pace, overwhelming schedule with Americans looking to fulfill their needs through affordable and easily reachable means. There has been an increased approval in fast food and convenience store establishments that provide swift and stimulating products. It is the inexpensive and easy way to purchase these “goods” that is slowly deterring the well-being of our country. The reason behind the low prices of such unhealthy choices provided by fast food restaurants and convenience stores is attributed to the subsidizing of producers of companies making the junk food. These companies such as McDonald’s, Coke, Pepsi, and Burger King contribute to the amplified rates of diabetes and obesity. Therefore a sensible solution is to tax the companies’ goods to make them less attractive to consumers who sequentially will lead improved life in buying less expensive, healthier foods.

The government should control the American peoples’ diet. Poor diet choices result in increased health care costs which affects every tax payer in America. Poor diet contributes to obesity which results in an increase in a plethora of diseases. The cost of these diseases has a huge economic impact on the country. The government owes it to its citizens to control these costs through diet regulation. It also owes its citizens the opportunity for optimal health.

“…..the government subsidizes the corn and soybeans used for animal feed and vegetable oil” (636) This practice makes unhealthy food more cost effective and healthy options more expensive. With the revenue from a sugary drink tax the fruit and vegetable farmers could potentially see some subsidizing. If healthier options were more affordable then consumers would eat healthier. When a family of five can eat a frozen pizza for four dollars or have a healthy meal of stir fry chicken for sixteen dollars, it is most likely they will choose the pizza. On the opposite side of the scale is the manufacturers. Ultimately the food manufacturers will produce what makes them money. If the healthier foods are in higher demand, then that fact may force their hand to create healthier options. In the end society wins. Junk food is in high demand because it is affordable and fast. Making unhealthy options less affordable takes away much of the

Taxing junk food will assist in the rising health problems in the United States. Obesity is a growing problem, if the government created a junk food tax, it would help reduce obesity. In the article “Junk Food Tax Could Improve Health” by Kristina Fiore, it says that if junk food had an eighteen percent tax than it would “result in a 56-calorie decline … that would translate to about five pounds per patient per year” (Fiore 1). This is an example of two benefits gained from taxing junk food. First, the eighteen percent tax that is collected would help support health care issues and second people would buy less junk food due to the rising costs. When consumers buy less junk food, they consume less, which will reduce the obesity rate.

First of all, a junk food tax needs to be placed to end the obesity and diabetes epidemic. For example, too many people are suffering from diabetes, but CEOs of companies like Lay’s and Pepsi don’t really care. According to Authority Nutrition,

We live in a busy era. In a blink of an eye a week and even a month passes by. Time is precious, and people are trying to cut corners in order to get things done faster. Most families have both parents working. After a long working day there is no desire to spend another couple of hours by the stove preparing dinner. The convenience of fast food has replaced most family’s homemade meals. Because of this, many Americans, especially children, eat processed food every day. The usual menu consist of a sugary cereal for breakfast, a “hot dog” and chips for lunch, and chicken nuggets and fries for dinner. Such processed food has a little or no nutritional value, which is why it is often called “junk food.” But why would any parent feed junk to their children? Is the body a garbage disposal? Why do people choose unhealthy foods? The problem is that it is very cheap, tasty, and in most cases it does not require cooking, which saves people a lot of time and money. However, junk food should be taxed because of these three reasons. First, it causes people to be overweight which leads to many health problems. Second, taxing junk food will encourage people to choose a healthier diet.

Raising food taxes is the topic of the editorial article “Slapping a tax on junk food is still a bad idea” by the Globe and Mail. The writer states that raising taxes is not the answer to decrease high obesity rates and instead suggests that moderation and lifestyle are key to enjoying food. The editorial also acknowledges the increasing amount of attention we give to this problem now that it has grown larger and more complex. Also, an increase of taxes ultimately allow the consumers to have the last say in what they consume. The writer argues that an increase of taxes on junk foods is not necessary for society; my research will focus on whether this is true or not.

That has gone without, including paying for breakfast to be held in schools as kids won’t be getting a decent breakfast at home because their parents and guardians would have to pay more for the food that they want. However, I personally don’t agree with this statement, from my perspective, putting a tax on junk food won’t necessarily eradicate the obesity and type 2 diabetes epidemics from overconsuming junk foods, but it will reduce the consumption by a certain amount, however it’s something that’s not going to happen overnight. This is similar to smoking in the sense that smoking is taxed because it’s pernicious not only to the person concerned, but the society around them and even though smoking is taxed, people are still prepared to buy cigarettes at a ridiculously expensive price so they can still smoke, but the number of people that smoke has decreased by a reasonable amount. Therefore if the government puts a tax on junk food it will have a corresponding effect as to how smoking was taxed.

That have gone without, including paying for breakfast to be held in schools as kids won’t be getting a decent breakfast at home because their parents and guardians would be having to pay more for the food that they want. However, I personally don’t agree with this statement, putting a tax on junk food won’t necessarily eradicate the obesity and type 2 diabetes epidemic from overconsuming junk foods, but it will reduce the consumption by a certain amount, however it’s something that’s not going to happen overnight. This is similar to smoking in the sense that smoking is taxed because it’s pernicious not only to the person concerned, but the society around them and even though smoking is taxed, people are still prepared to buy cigarettes at a ridiculously expensive price so they can still smoke, but the number of people that smoke has decreased by a reasonable amount. Research….. Therefore if the government puts a tax on junk food it will have a corresponding effect as to how smoking was taxed.

Junk food has been getting a bad rap recently in society. It is believed that junk food is a leading factor in childhood obesity and should not be allowed in public schools. Due to this many school systems have enacted bans, or strict regulations that limit or completely exclude junk food in schools. Junk food should not be banned in schools because schools profit and are able to fund education and extracurricular activities through selling it, junk food isn’t as harmful as one would think, and even if schools ban junk food students can still be at risk of obesity through the use of outside sources.