Viewpoint one talks about how in San Francisco and Chicago, politicians allowed sugary drinks to be taxed. The newfound movement of taxing junk food is supported by the mayor of New York. However, big soda companies do not see this as a big deal. In fact they are use to these taxes popping up every so often. Currently, seven cities have a tax on soda or juice including Philadelphia. There are not any studies that prove that placing taxes on soda will decrease obesity. Lately, many cities and states are contemplating whether or not to add these taxes. Hillary Clinton agrees with the tax, but Bernie Sanders opposes it. Soda Companies think that using commercials and making healthier drinks will be better than taxes them. Taxing unhealthy drinks is a way to reduce America’s obesity level.
Viewpoint two talks about the controversy on whether soda such be taxed. One side states that the taxes on drinks could lower diabetes. The other side states that the taxes would not decrease people buying soda. Kelly Brownell agrees with taxes because she believes that it will reduce obesity. She says that as a result of taxing cigarettes, smoking has decreased. In comparison, taxing soda will lower obesity. She also says that these taxes will lower the Medicare cost for American citizens. However, William Shughart state that the
…show more content…
Everybody knows that junk food and fatty snacks are not healthy. They are, in fact, harmful to human body. Eating unhealthy foods increases obesity, early death, and other diseases. So, placing taxes would discourage people from eating unhealthy food. It may not stop people eating fatty foods completely. However it will definitely reduce it to a significant amount. Secondly, healthy food will be made more affordable. By making junk food more expensive, healthy food will be cheaper in comparison, which would result in more people picking healthier