There is on going debate weather unhealthy food producer, such as junk food outlet, should pay tax to the state to prevent the more distribution of it. However, this essay dissagree with that views. In my point of view rather than taxing unhealthy food, subsiding healthy food is an approrpiate option, since it is state responsibility to maintain the citizen healthy.
Some people argue that authorities should make a policy to tax unhealthy food in order to reduce its distribution in public. This policy would incarease the price of junk food, because the production cost of it also increase, which is the tax. The people in this side believe that implenting this kind of policy is an adequate soulution to reduce consumption of the junk food , because the cost is to high. In contrast, I do not agree with this argument, since the people who love unhealthy food will still buy it, no matter weather it is expensive or not.
The opposite side for the first argument believe that subsiding the healthy food is the best choice to maintain the health of citizen. This is will encourage people to buy and consume the the healthy food, such as vegetable and fruit, due to the fact that most of the people do not consume those kind of food because it is expensive and they cannot afford it. To illustatre, in Indonesia, people prefer to buy oil-processed food rather than fruit, as the cost of fruit is more expensive than oil-processed food. Although subsiding the healthy food will burden the national spending budget, it is the responsibility of goverment to maintain prosvaraty of citizen, including the healthy food.
To enscaptulate, some people argue that state should tax unhealthy food producer, such as junk food, to decrease the more distribution of it, but i dissagree with that views, since that policy will not effective to maintain the number of junk food costumers. Rather than taxing unhealthy food, subsiding healthy food is an approrpiate option, since it is authorities responsibility.