In some countries an increasing number of people are suffering from health problems as a result of eating too much fast food. It is therefore necessary for governments to impose a higher tax on this kind of food.

The problem of whether or not government institutions should charge higher fees on junk food has sparked a heated debate.

While

Linking Words

some argue that it is a cheap source of calories, I contend that implementation of

such

Linking Words

measures would positively affect people’s health. There are several reasons why opponents of

this

Linking Words

idea maintain that low taxes are essential for the fast food industry, with the most salient being that bistros are a substantial part of the lower class’s diet.

For instance

Linking Words

,

according to

Linking Words

a survey revealed by the Food Institute of the U.S. canned meal makes up most of the poor people’s ration.Another cogent argument is that applying

such

Linking Words

charges would significantly increase inflation, which might precipitate economic collapse. I firmly believe that increasing taxes on convenience meals is relatively positive, primarily

due to

Linking Words

its implications for healthcare preservation.

Furthermore

Linking Words

,reducing obesity among citizens substantiates

this

Linking Words

stance.

For example

Linking Words

, Denmark’s case illustrates how price promotion of bistros has drastically reduced the number of diseases.

This

Linking Words

is particularly desirable as it would culminate in a rising interest in healthy dishes. In summary,

while

Linking Words

opponents contend that setting higher fees has a negative effect on poor-class people’s diet, l unequivocally assert that imposing taxes is the more pragmatic and beneficial approach