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 reading states that considering taxes for unhealthy products such as cigarettes and unheathy foods have several advantages for the government and society. The klecturer, however, finds the idea dubious and csts doubt on the reasons proposed by the reading passage.
The author argues that rasing taxes for these unhealthy behavior prevent people to do that,which results in a heathier society. Conversely, the lecturer brings up this idea that raising taxes may lead people to by cheaper products with lower quality, as a result they will be more likely to obesity and health problems.
Furthermore, the reading passage holds the view that, this way can be considered as a fair action, in which the people who have heathy lives can benefit will be eaual to others who use more some of public services. On the contrary, the professor underlines the fact that by rasing the taxes, the situation will not be equal for both group of people, one who has a higher income, and the other with a lower incomes. As a result, it puts more pressure on poor people to handle the condition and also answer their addiction.
Finally, the reading states that these taxes provides the government with the golden opportunity to spend this money on other projects which can be beneficial for all people. The speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that it has some downside for the society, because the government cannot prevent people to smoke in public places such as parks due to their need on the money they pay. As a result it does not seem to be beneficial for public welfare.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...asons proposed by the reading passage. The author argues that rasing taxes for the...
^^^
Line 2, column 91, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , which
...althy behavior prevent people to do that,which results in a heathier society. Converse...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, conversely, finally, furthermore, however, may, so, such as, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1306.0 1373.03311258 95% => OK
No of words: 270.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.83703703704 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05360046442 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45458055611 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.52962962963 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 402.3 419.366225166 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 27.0 21.2450331126 127% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 49.3132842143 49.2860985944 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.6 110.228320801 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.0 21.698381199 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.5 7.06452816374 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.207011438314 0.272083759551 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.085833325014 0.0996497079465 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0828382204151 0.0662205650399 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.135494796621 0.162205337803 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0562594076515 0.0443174109184 127% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.3589403974 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 53.8541721854 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 11.0289183223 114% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.09 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.66 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.498013245 122% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.