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

Essay topics:

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 lecture and reading both talk about the policy of taxes on cigarettes and other unhealthy products. The passage states that there are similar taxes for unhealthy foods. On the other hand, the speaker rejects all the claims and casts doubt upon them.

Firstly, the author wrote the text claims that taxes are going to discourage people from unhealthy materials. In addition, taxes on unhealthy food would help reduce obesity rates. In contrast, the orator opposes saying taxes do not necessarily lead to help your behavior. Besides, she mentioned an example of some consumers reacts to such high taxes.

Second, from the author's point of view, taxes in these kinds would not be fair, because people create expenses results of getting sick. The monologue rebuts this claim about different ways of thinking of fairness. As a result, she states that some people argue some taxes are not fair and not affordable for them.

Lastly, the passage advocates a high range of taxation on unhealthy products increases revenue for the government. Conversely, the audio lesson challenges the tax revenue for the project has a downside, and the government's expenses are depending on taxes.

To sum up, in the lecturer view government's expenses are based on taxes they get from people, this is because there are no banned places for smoking and no special places for cigarette to not lose income.

Votes
Average: 7.8 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 233, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
... downside, and the governments expenses are depending on taxes. To sum up, in the lecture...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, conversely, first, firstly, if, lastly, second, so, in addition, in contrast, as a result, to sum up, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 12.0772626932 25% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 22.412803532 54% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => 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: 1167.0 1373.03311258 85% => OK
No of words: 229.0 270.72406181 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.096069869 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.89008302616 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42426128375 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.585152838428 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 358.2 419.366225166 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
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: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.2275843774 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.7692307692 110.228320801 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6153846154 21.698381199 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.2307692308 7.06452816374 145% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.338503789922 0.272083759551 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.118694042261 0.0996497079465 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0835589953958 0.0662205650399 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180886260334 0.162205337803 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0758323438303 0.0443174109184 171% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.0 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.