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.
The passage states several benefits relating to the topic about higher taxes on people purchasing cigarettes and unhealthy products, whereas the professor believes that all three benefits can be challenged.
First of all, the reading insists that the high taxes discourage people from indulging in unhealthy behaviors, since it leads people to buy fewer unhealthy products. The professor, however, argues that it won't work out or even do more harm for people's health, because, to balance the extra tax, people would buy cheaper cigarettes which have lower quality and have more harmful contents. For people who spend more money to buy unhealthy food, therefore, they have less money to spend on healthy food in that case.
Furthermore, the author of the reading claims that the taxes of this kind are financially fair, by the explanation that extra taxes are paid from people who engage in unhealthy behaviors to cover the medical cost. In contrast, the professor suggests that the taxes are not fair, as people who have higher income and those who have lower income are paying same amount of tax. The high tax of those would be a greater burden for low-income people than those who are richer, which is not fair to them.
Finally, the author claims that the high rate of taxation will benefit public because the significantly increased revenue. On the contrary, the professor indicates that it would even do more harm for public by the evidence that the government won't band smoking in public area or restrict those unhealthy behavior because they don't want to lose the income from those people who pay high tax for the cigarettes.
- Car manufacturers and governments have been eagerly seeking a replacement for the automobile s main source of power the internal combustion engine By far the most promising alternative source of energy for cars is the hydrogen based fuel cell engine which 68
- All parents should be required to volunteer time to their children s schools Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your position be sure to address the most compelling r 50
- Teaching is harder today than it was in the past 70
- The rules that societies today expect young people to follow and obey are too strict 76
- TPO 54 Integrated Writing 75
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 8, column 327, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...t those unhealthy behavior because they dont want to lose the income from those peop...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, furthermore, however, if, so, therefore, whereas, in contrast, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 12.0772626932 149% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1371.0 1373.03311258 100% => OK
No of words: 273.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02197802198 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.41618896461 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.512820512821 0.540411800872 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 422.1 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 30.0 21.2450331126 141% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 52.646503407 49.2860985944 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.333333333 110.228320801 138% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.3333333333 21.698381199 140% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.0 7.06452816374 170% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.263400989986 0.272083759551 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123076698301 0.0996497079465 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0408960125543 0.0662205650399 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171373339748 0.162205337803 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.021600206942 0.0443174109184 49% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.4 13.3589403974 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.49 53.8541721854 92% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.0289183223 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.43 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.54 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 10.498013245 133% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.