Some people think the government should subsidise fruit and vegetables to make healthy food more affordable.Others argue that the government should tax unhealthy food instead.

It is considered by some that the government should take action to make healthy meals more

reasonable

Correct word choice

affordable

show examples

,

while

Linking Words

others think that a higher tax burden should be applied to junk food. Personally, I believe that a combination of both of these approaches will yield the best result. On the one hand, I agree that a reasonably priced wholesome meal will have a greater impact on eating habits. Since

,

Punctuation problem

apply

show examples

nowadays, the population is already financially burdened to support their family, carrying out different life expenditures, subsidising the price of natural products will definitely encourage people to eat better. Of course, one drawback is that the public tends to overlook the significance of food that comes at a lower price.

On the other hand

Linking Words

, I think that an additional tax can help reduce the consumption of ham foods.

For instance

Linking Words

, excise duty on alcohol in some countries proved to be an effective way of lowering sales of

this

Linking Words

type of product.

Moreover

Linking Words

, a so-called “sugar tax” is imposed in the UK on soft drinks to decrease the risk of diabetes.

However

Linking Words

, higher prices do not prevent consumers from buying obviously harmful products

such

Linking Words

as cigarettes and vapes.

To conclude

Linking Words

,

while

Linking Words

subsidising the price of healthy food to make it more attractive to citizens may have a positive influence, an additional taxation of unhealthy

nourishments

Check wording

foods

show examples

can discourage people from purchasing them. So the money raised can

then

Linking Words

be used to subsidise fruits and vegetables. Whilst, in my view, the best way forward is to employ both strategies in tandem.