Introduction
Without any doubt, sugar is a grave problem in the modern world, as it caused severe health issues and appeals to numerous individuals at the same time. Experts in many different fields, ranging from biochemistry to the economy, argue about eliminating its adverse effects. Scientists endeavor to create effective and realistic alternatives to sugar, while policymakers concentrate on workable legislation to reduce sugar consumption. Caitlin Dewey focused on the latter, stated her position, and supported it with sound arguments in the article The Case for Taxing Sugar, not Soda. She discussed the benefits and drawbacks of taxing sugary beverages, presented another option with its advantages and disadvantages, and explained why policymakers ignore the most effective one. In general, the article contains powerful arguments, explains the issue entirely and carefully, and appears to be objective, as it includes two points of view.
Main body
First, Dewey mentioned different perspectives on taxing sugary beverages with their advantages and disadvantages. On the one hand, she proved that it is better to tax the amount of sugar rather than the number of fluid ounces. The reason for it is that such taxes can reduce sugar consumption by 25%, and it is 3% more than the ones focusing on fluid ounces (Dewey, 1). Moreover, the first option can ease the consumer burden and encourage manufacturers to reformulate some of their products (Dewey, 1). On the other hand, Dewey admitted that the second option is more cost-effective and realistic on the local level. Therefore, the article seems to be unbiased because it critically evaluates the issue from different points of view.
Second, Dewey presented sound arguments supported by the quotes of professionals in different fields. The author emphasized the importance of the study conducted by Donald Marron and his colleagues at the Urban Institute and analyzed its results. She also included the information presented by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and the American Hearn Organizations. Undoubtedly, all the claims of the representatives of such respectable institutions should be taken into account before making any conclusions regarding taxing sugary beverages.
Finally, the author clearly explained the thorny issue by using figures and emphasizing essential details so that readers can see the big picture. For example, Dewey successfully described all the differences between taxes focusing on the amount of sugar and the ones concentrating on the number of ounces. Furthermore, she analyzed different aspects of the problem paying attention to even small details. According to Dewey, “In the United States, seven cities and one county have passed soda taxes: Philadelphia, San Francisco, Cook County, Illinois (which includes Chicago), Boulder, Colorado, and Berkeley, Oakland and Albany, California” (1). Hence, even if readers are likely to forget many facts soon, they get a better understanding of the issue and can make their judgments regardless of the author’s perspective.
Conclusion
In conclusion, The Case for Taxing Sugar, not Soda is an excellent example of an unbiased and informative article, which encourages readers to consider the issue of taxing sugary beverages on their own. Dewey’s arguments are strong and compelling, as she not only shared her perspective but also included the claims of the dedicated professionals. The author also described two different views on the issue and explained their advantages and disadvantages. Besides, she presented numerous details, which largely contribute to readers’ understanding. Therefore, the article written by Dewey is worth deep consideration and appreciation.
Work Cited
Dewey, Caitlin. “The Case for Taxing Sugar, not Soda.” The Washington Post, 2016.