Wednesday, March 21, 2018

Taxes and Lunches

In Mark Bittman's article "Bad Food? Tax It, and Subsidize Vegetables", he discusses his idea on taxing unhealthy food to make it less convenient to buy when compared to healthier foods. He proposes the idea with the conclusion that obesity, disease, and other food-related issues will decline with people being less inclined to buy sugary foods for an extra price. Acknowledging that companies that process junk food would be affected by the change, Bittman supports his idea with the argument that people will buy healthier foods that are cheaper, specifically the poor, thus improving their overall health. However, I disagree with his idea due to the ongoing inflation of the economy. Every few years, prices and the minimum wage of jobs raise slightly, making little difference between the price of products (food in this case) each time. Adding an extra dollar or two to the current price of foods won't really come as a huge difference to people, and they'll simply continue buying the same unhealthy foods. And, while healthy foods would become more convenient to buy, people would most likely buy a mix of them with unhealthy foods, maintaining a diet similar to the one we currently have.
In Alice Waters and Katrina Heron's article "No Lunch Left Behind", they discuss the issue of government funding for unhealthy school lunch programs. They enlighten us on how billions of dollars are spent each year to fund school lunch programs, but the majority of the money goes into maintaining the cafeterias and paying their workers rather than the kids, who end up eating unhealthy foods that contribute to bad health. In contrast to the current system, Waters and Heron suggest a revised lunch system where only foods that are freshly grown and unprocessed are served, arguing that kids would develop healthier eating habits and diets overall, though it would remain expensive. In my opinion, the introduction of healthier school lunch programs are definitely possible and can easily be done by Congress, as Waters and Heron mentioned in the article. I've stepped away from getting school lunch all together because, no matter how healthy they make it seem, the pizza does not seem fresh. Neither do other foods like the chicken nuggets, or chicken sandwiches they always seem to serve. Even most of the vegetables seem recooked or come in packages, like carrot bags. It all does not seem a hundred percent healthy, and I agree fresh foods imported from a farm would definitely be more beneficial to schools everywhere.

My current research topic revolves around fast food playing a part in the spread of food-related diseases and obesity in Americans, as well as countries that have been inspired by the eating habits of the United States. Here's an article about the growth of fast food industries and their effects.
http://archive.commercialalert.org/issues/education/soft-drinks/the-fast-food-trap-how-commercialism-creates-overweight-children
-Kris Rubalcava

3 comments:

  1. I agree, us kids shouldn't be thrown under the bus. Our health matters too. If anything it matters the most.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree if the government does something, students can easily get a better, nutritious lunch. It's always about the money. The benefits will definitely be worth it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I like the fact that you disagree with Bittman's proposal. You acknowledged how his plan will falter do to inflation and the constant rise of minimum wage and prices, so I was wondering how much do you think unhealthy foods should be taxed, if any? Should our government tax it the way they did with cigarettes, as a pack in California is now $7.89. A great difference from its past $2.87 price.

    ReplyDelete