Now listen to part of a lecture on the topic you just read about.
Each of the arguments about the benefits of cigarette and other such taxes can be challenged.
First, these taxes don't necessarily lead to healthier behavior. For instance, high cigarette taxes have led some smokers to buy cheaper lower quality cigarettes. Such cigarettes typically contain even more harmful substances than better quality cigarettes and present even greater health risks. Similarly, imagine how some consumers might react to higher taxes on unhealthy foods. They might continue buying the unhealthy foods they prefer even if they're more expensive. And as a result, have less money left to spend on healthy foods. That certainly wouldn't benefit their health.
Second, there are different ways of thinking about fairness. It might seem fair for people indulging in unhealthy behaviors to pay for the consequences of those behaviors through high taxes. But some people would argue that these taxes are unfair, because they don't take into account people's incomes. If a high-earning person and a lower-earning person are addicted to cigarettes and each smokes a pack of cigarettes a day. Paying the tax would be a greater expense for the low earner relative to his or her income. The same argument applies to the food taxes. So many people believe that these taxes are not fair because they create a much greater burden for those with smaller incomes than for those with higher incomes.
Finally, the fact that governments can use this tax revenue for various projects has the downside. This income represents millions and millions of dollars and governments become dependent on it and don't want to lose it. In consequence, the governments might not be forceful enough pursuing policies and implementing laws that might eliminate unhealthy habits altogether. For example, they are unlikely to adopt radical measure such as not allowing smoking in outdoor public areas such as parks or even banning smoking in all outdoor areas, public or private, because they don't want to lose this income.
According to the reading passage, in many countries, some rules and policies of imposing high tax on cigarettes and unhealthy food are being enacted and it might seem such laws have got some beneficial effects on people's health. However, the advantageous of these policies can be challenged and the professor brings some ideas to refute them all.
First of all, it seems that taxation will result to the discourages of people who indulging in smoking cigarettes as well as consuming unhealthy food. On the contrary, the professor asserts that such policies lead to that smokers use cheaper and low-quality cigarettes which are unhealthier and might have got greater amount of dangerous substances. Also, such story will be true about the buying unhealthier food, because people will prefer to buy such unhealthier food even if they are much expensive, as a result, pay much money for them and then will remain lower money to buy healthy food.
Furthermore, smoking cigarettes or buying unhealthy food will result in an excessive cost of the medical care and imposing taxes on theses unhealthy products can cover such extra fees and are financially fair. In contrast, the professor underlies that people might think different about fairness, because imposing fairs on cigarettes and unhealthy food have got different effects on people related to their incomes and lower gainers will definitely are subjected to heavier burdens of high tax cigarettes in comparison to high gainer. It seems that such circumstances will occur for purchasing unhealthy food.
Finally, governments will be provided a great many of benefits by imposing taxes on cigarettes and unhealthy food which can be used for public welfare like building stadiums, public parks or even education. Conversely, the professor dismisses this issue due to the fact that with taxation, governments will receive millions of dollars and in the long run will depend on them, and then do not want to lose such money. As a result, governments will not be forced to avoid coming smokers to the in door or out door public places like parks.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-11-10 | yasy.j728@gmail.com | 80 | view |
| 2020-11-10 | yasy.j728@gmail.com | 80 | view |
| 2019-10-06 | farshad_hom | 86 | view |
- Elephants are fascinating but the beliefs you just read about are based on misunderstandings of elephant behavior First we should not assume that old elephants are aware that they will die soon just because they break away from their herds There is a very 93
- Do you agree or disagree with the following sentences movie and television have more negative effects on young people 76
- The benefits claimed for electronic medical records are actually every uncertain First the costs savings are unlikely be as significant as the reading suggests For example there probably won t be any savings related to record storage You see doctors who a 76
- ProfessorIt s perfectly possible that the nests found inside the fossilized trees were made by bees 200 million years ago The arguments used by the skeptics are not convincing First it s true we have no fossil remains of actual bees that date to 200 milli 80
- Professor There should definitely be stricter rules adopted for handling and disposing of coal ash First the regulations we have now for example those that require companies to use liner are not really sufficient Under the current regulations liner has to 85
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, so, then, well, as to, in contrast, as a result, as well as, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 5.04856512141 337% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 17.0 7.30242825607 233% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 30.3222958057 145% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1756.0 1373.03311258 128% => OK
No of words: 342.0 270.72406181 126% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13450292398 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30037696126 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68076196824 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 145.348785872 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.505847953216 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 532.8 419.366225166 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 31.0 21.2450331126 146% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 66.4912844596 49.2860985944 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 159.636363636 110.228320801 145% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.0909090909 21.698381199 143% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.6363636364 7.06452816374 193% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.203390530341 0.272083759551 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.089388252151 0.0996497079465 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0515164267803 0.0662205650399 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140123188853 0.162205337803 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0375916654751 0.0443174109184 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.3 13.3589403974 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.01 53.8541721854 74% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.0289183223 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.07 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 63.6247240618 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 10.498013245 137% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => 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.