Reading
Questions
12345678
Reading 1/2:
Bad Food? Tax It, and Subsidize Vegetables
Mark Bittman writes about food for the opinion section of the New York Times.
What will it take to get us Americans to change our eating habits? The need is indisputable, since heart disease, diabetes and cancer are all in large part caused by the Standard American Diet. (Yes, it's SAD.) Though experts increasingly recommend a diet high in plants and low in animal products and processed foods, ours is quite the opposite, and there's little disagreement that changing it could improve our health and save tens of millions of lives. And not unimportant during the current struggle over budgets and spending - a sane diet could save tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars in health care costs.
Yet the food industry appears incapable of marketing healthier foods. And whether its leaders are confused or just stalling doesn't matter, because the fixes are not really their problem. Their mission is not public health but profit, so they'll continue to sell the health-damaging food that's most profitable, until the market or another force makes them do otherwise. That "other force"should be the federal government, fulfilling its role as an agent of the public good.
Rather than subsidizing the production of unhealthful foods, we should do the opposite and tax things like soda, French fries, doughnuts, and hyper-processed snacks. The resulting income should be given to a program that encourages a good diet for Americans by making healthy food more affordable and widely available.
The average American consumes 44.7 gallons of soft drinks annually. (Although that includes diet sodas, it does not include noncarbonated sweetened beverages, which add up to at least
Next Question
17 gallons a person per year.) Sweetened drinks could be taxed at 2 cents per ounce, so a six-pack of Pepsi would cost $1.44 more than it does now. An equivalent tax on fries might be 50 cents per serving; a quarter extra for a doughnut. (We have experts who can figure out how "bad" a food should be to qualify, and what the rate should be. Diet sodas would not be taxed.)Simply put: Taxes would reduce consumption of unhealthful foods and generate billions of dollars annually. That money could be used to subsidize the purchase of staple foods' like seasonal greens, vegetables, whole grains, dried legumes, and fruit. We could sell those staples cheap let's say for 50 cents a pound and almost everywhere: drugstores, street corners.convenience stores, bodegas, supermarkets, liquor stores, even schools, libraries and other community centers.Right now it's harder for many people to buy fruit than Froot Loops; chips and Coke are a common breakfast. And since the rate of diabetes continues to soar- one-third of all Americans
either have diabetes or are pre-diabetic, most with Type 2 diabetes, the kind associated with bad eating habits -and because our health care bills are about to become truly insurmountable.
this is urgent for economic sanity as well as national health.
Next Reading
1)What health issues are largely caused by the Standard American Diet (SAD), according to the text?
A. Respiratory problems and heart disease
B. Heart disease, diabetes, and cancer
. Infectious diseases and cancer
D. Mental health disorders and diabetes
2) According to the author, why is the food industry reluctant to market healthier foods?
A. Confusion among industry leaders B. Lack of government regulations
. Focus on profitability over public health C
D. Insufficient consumer demand
3) What is suggested as a solution to encourage a healthier diet for Americans?
A.
Increase marketing for processed snacks B. Subsidize the production of unhealthful foods
C. Provide free healthcare services
D. Tax soda, French fries, and doughnuts
41 How drags the author pronnea to use the incoma nanaratod from taving unhealthful fonde?
