There is an increase in a number of illnesses related to poor diets, containing processed, highly addictive foods and drinks. Upon this issue, some suggest that tariffs should be levied on these products, as a resemble of other unhealthy consumptions such as cigarettes and liquors. However, others criticize that this would affect low-income individuals, as they could financially struggle. In my opinion, I support the first view, as taxing money can later contribute to lowering organic goods.
Many people advocate for governments to introduce heavy taxes on unhealthy foods because this strategy has been successful in the past. Jeopardizing substances such as cigarettes and alcoholic drinks have been significantly taxed in Vietnam, for example, to deter people from overly consuming. This initiative is proved to be effective in altering Vietnamese consumption patterns, as they either reduce or even stop using them. Therefore, it is sensible to put additional charges on unhealthy foods due to their potential to replicate past success.
On the other hand, a large proportion of people argue that this approach is more likely to affect financially disabled individuals and foster an unequal society. Fast food is often more affordable than organic, fresh food, so it is easier for low-income or people with financial difficulty to consume. Not to mention that, people with hectic working schedules rarely have time to prepare food by themselves; hence, they tend to resort to processed, readily-cooked meals to feed themselves and their families. However, this is less likely to influence affluent individuals, as they have the ability to withstand pricy taxes and continue to afford unhealthy meals and drinks.
Personally, I support the proposal of levying taxes on harmful consumption, as it can change people’s eating habits and tax money can be channeled to making organic food more affordable to the general public.
In conclusion, many are displeased with charging more for readily cooked, processed foods and sugary drinks, arguing it puts low-income people in financial difficulty, while rarely affecting wealthy individuals, which is unfair and rather enlarges the financial gap within society. I, however, agree with the opposite view, believing that it is more beneficial, as this can alter people’s consumption, resembling past success. Additionally, money received from taxation can be relocated to make organic food accessible to the general public.