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 idea or main message of the passage being subtantiated with reasons are bolstering positive sides of imposing tax on cigarettes. However, the speaker in the recording challenged with the passage mentioned corroborations and mentioned her point of view on imposing taxes on cigarettes. Her reasons are as follows:
First of all speaker mentioned that after imposing tax on cigarettes, people will start buying cheaper cigarettes. Moreover, buying such cheaper cigarettes increases tendency to avoid buying expensive one and they always keep on buying the cheaper one. Their health in the long run could get worsen more, it might damage their health still more.
Secondly speaker mentioned that due to unequal amount of earnings and salary of poeple, the people of high salary may afford but not the people with low level salary, meaning that affordable money for purchasing is not equal for all people.
Thirdly speaker stated her logic that the government will be highly depedent on the public that they have now find a good source of revenue generation. For the people who keep on having cigarettes in the long run, might take huge amount of money of government for treatment for them in fallout. At the same time she mentioned that the government could have banned or restricted having cigarettes at certain places to people, but they are not doing it.
In sum, the speaker has refuted all three reasons mentioned by author by putting forward her logics in the recording.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 111, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'found'.
Suggestion: found
...pedent on the public that they have now find a good source of revenue generation. Fo...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, third, thirdly, first of all
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: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1240.0 1373.03311258 90% => OK
No of words: 244.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.08196721311 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95227774224 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56360894752 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 137.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.561475409836 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 375.3 419.366225166 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More 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: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.1918499113 49.2860985944 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.0 110.228320801 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4 21.698381199 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.3 7.06452816374 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.164375179581 0.272083759551 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0631331130042 0.0996497079465 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0319445622757 0.0662205650399 48% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0761827582469 0.162205337803 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0411608255992 0.0443174109184 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.3589403974 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.48 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.13 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 51.0 63.6247240618 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.