Many countries require cigarette smokers to pay particularly high taxes on their purchases of cigarettes; similar taxes are being considered for unhealthy foods. The policy of imposing high taxes on cigarettes and other unhealthy products has a number of social benefits.
First of all, the taxes discourage people from indulging in unhealthy behaviors. Raising taxes on cigarettes, for instance, leads people to buy fewer of them. Smoking has declined as taxes on tobacco have risen, showing that these taxes do work to make society healthier. It can be expected that imposing similar taxes on unhealthy food and beverages would help reduce obesity rates.
Second, taxes of this kind are financially fair. When people get sick as a result of their smoking or eating unhealthy foods, they create medical costs. It is unfair that everyone in the society—including nonsmokers and people who follow a healthy diet—should contribute equally to covering these costs. Taxing people who engage in unhealthy behaviors creates extra income that can be used to cover the medical costs. In this way, some of the financial burden is shifted from all of society to just those who choose to participate in the unhealthy activities.
Finally, the high rate of taxation on cigarettes significantly increases revenue for the government. In addition to using this tax revenue on medical assistance, governments often use the revenue for other projects that benefit public welfare, such as building stadiums or creating public parks. Even basic government-supported services like public education benefit from these taxes. Thus, the taxes on cigarettes—and the proposed taxes on unhealthy foods—benefit everyone.
Both the article and lecture deal with whether to impose high taxes on cigarettes as well as other harmful products. While the author of the reading thinks that it will brings up a copious benefits for three specific reasons, the lecturer opposes the author's claims. In his opinion, these advantages can be challenged.
First, the writer claims that the increases taxes can lead to people buying them less. It is stated in the article that assembling tobacco, higher taxes on unhealthy food and drinks would have positive influence. In contrast, the lecturer argues that this doesn't necessarily work. For part of the smokers, instead of being discouraged, they have to choose cheaper cigarettes with lower quality which contains more harmful ingredients and have greater risks. Similarly, people who prefer unhealthy food have to spend more money on them, resulting in have less budget on healthy food.
Second, the author mentions that increasing taxes is economically fair. In the article, it is said that nonsmokers can benefit from the extra finance to cover the medical costs. However, the lecturer calls this into argument by saying that with the awareness of that people's income differed, for those with higher salary it makes some sense. But when it comes to lower paid consumers, it imposes much greater burden on them and have difficult in affording the cost.
Finally, the writer asserts that the government are willing to embrace more revenue and spend it in public welfare infrastructures. Along with financially supported social services springing up, taxing unhealthy things bring good outcome for everyone. As opposed to the writer, the lecturer holds that taking the real circumstance into consideration, if the government enjoys improved revenue from the higher rate of taxation, it will become dependent on the outrageous income. Naturally, instead of supporting regions like education and public transport, the government are more willing to pursuing aspects that bring more revenue. The leader won't be pleasant to lose this part of income.
- Many countries require cigarette smokers to pay particularly high taxes on their purchases of cigarettes similar taxes are being considered for unhealthy foods The policy of imposing high taxes on cigarettes and other unhealthy products has a number of so 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is more important for governments to spend money to improve Internet access than to improve public transportation Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 76
- Pterosaurs were an ancient group of winged reptiles that lived alongside the dinosaurs Many pterosaurs were very large some as large as a giraffe and with a wingspan of over 12 meters Paleontologists have long wondered whether large pterosaurs were capabl 80
- Humans have long been fascinated by elephants the largest land animal in the modern world Social animals that live in herds elephants are native to both Africa and Asia Their large ears long trunk and long life span have made elephants one of the most cap 65
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement The opinions of celebrities such as famous entertainers and athletes are more important to younger people than they are to older people Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 170, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'bring'
Suggestion: bring
...thor of the reading thinks that it will brings up a copious benefits for three specifi...
^^^^^^
Line 1, column 190, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'benefit'?
Suggestion: benefit
...thinks that it will brings up a copious benefits for three specific reasons, the lecture...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 257, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...contrast, the lecturer argues that this doesnt necessarily work. For part of the smoke...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, second, similarly, so, well, while, in contrast, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 43.0 30.3222958057 142% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1744.0 1373.03311258 127% => OK
No of words: 328.0 270.72406181 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31707317073 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25567506705 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6070407004 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 145.348785872 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.594512195122 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 528.3 419.366225166 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.485913948 49.2860985944 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 102.588235294 110.228320801 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2941176471 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.47058823529 7.06452816374 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.185703043845 0.272083759551 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.057012301511 0.0996497079465 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0680428712744 0.0662205650399 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111565528924 0.162205337803 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0553470026709 0.0443174109184 125% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.3 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 63.6247240618 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.