Outline for Bad Food: Tax It
Title: Longshot Call
for Food Tax is Effective
Thesis: Bittman argues
that unhealthy foods should be taxed.
Although at first glance this issue seemed absurd to me, Bittman
effectively convinces the audience through anticipating opposition, using an
enhancing structure, and providing an analogy for support. However, he did have a weak point when giving
examples of where this was done before.
I.
Bittman refutes
opposition from the beginning section of the essay.
a.
He reminds the
audience that public health is part of the government’s responsibility.
i. He compares it to public health protection
through water treatment and mass transportation.
b.
Addresses questions
about the impact on poor people.
i. Say that it’s harder for them to buy healthy
foods now versus junk food.
ii. I found this point true based on my experience
working in a grocery store. He appealed
to logic.
II.
Through the structure
of the essay, he dangles all of the possible positive effects of the tax in
front of the audience.
a.
Makes it appear as
though it would be foolish not to support these taxes
i. As he puts it, “The benefits are
staggering.” He gives a board, very
optimistic list of problems that would potentially be resolved.
1.
He gives just enough
to keep the readers interested.
ii. He gives several shocking statistics about the
problem now.
1.
This keeps the
audience interested by opening their eyes to the need for action.
iii. Later into the paper, he provides more
detailed evidence of the expected results
III.
He provides a string
analogy to reassure the audience that this would actually work.
a.
A comparison to the
decline of the tobacco industry was given.
i. He realizes that the tobacco decline was
imperfect.
1.
This builds his
credibility as someone who is open-minded and understands that this is a
process.
ii. This provides reassurance that a tax such as
this could be passed legally and that it would be effective.
1.
Includes example about
the job market.
IV.
He attempts to create
a bandwagon effect in his pitch for the tax, but ultimately the plan backfires
and is a weak point in the argument.
a.
Provides examples of
where specific cities/ states have tried it.
i. He explains that these where ineffective.
b.
Provides examples of
other countries who are considering it, or who have tried it.
i. “Romania passed (and the un-passed” leaves
readers with questions about why it was un-passed.
Conclusion: The essay
was fairly effective in convincing the audience that the tax is necessary, but
did have a few weak points.
Body Paragraph on point I:
Bittman refutes opposition from the beginning section of the
essay. This has the effect of assuring
the audience and gaining support from some skeptics early on. One way in which he does this is through contesting
opposition which claims that the government does not have the authority to tax
unhealthy foods. He counters this
protest by reminding the audience that public health is part of the
government’s responsibility. By
providing the example of water treatment being moderated by the government, he
is able demonstrate to the audience how public health is a government concern. This makes the point that if one form of
public health is a responsibly of the government, then so should other public
health issues such as poor health because of unhealthy foods.
After gaining the trust of some skeptics because of government concerns,
Bittman moves right into anticipated opposition from spokesmen for the
poor. He makes the point that it is harder for poor
people to buy healthy foods now over more expensive healthy items. I found his argument here to appear true
based on my experiences as a cashier in a grocery store. Typically, it was cheaper for customers to
buy a pack of Little Debbie’s than a box of fresh strawberries. A four pack of sodium-filled Easy Mac’ would
be a cheaper alternative to hummus and whole wheat crackers. He claims that his
plan would reverse this trend.
