Question

Article: “Junk Food Tax: Well‑Intentioned or Bad Idea?”

1. Author’s Purpose:
What is the author trying to do? (inform, persuade, argue, explain, evaluate)
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
What clues show this purpose? (facts, statistics, expert opinions, emotional language)
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
What is the main message or claim of the article?
______________________________________________________________________________

Answer 1

1. Author’s Purpose:
- The author’s purpose is to evaluate and persuade — to weigh the pros and cons of a junk-food tax and convince readers of a reasoned conclusion.

What clues show this purpose?
- The title frames a debate (“Well‑Intentioned or Bad Idea?”), signaling evaluation.
- The piece likely uses facts and statistics (e.g., obesity rates, expected revenue, consumption changes) to support points.
- It probably cites expert opinions (health researchers, economists, policymakers) on effectiveness and consequences.
- It may include emotional language or anecdotes (stories about families, children, or public health impacts) to engage readers and strengthen the persuasive element.
- Use of counterarguments and rebuttals (showing pros and cons) indicates an evaluative approach.

What is the main message or claim of the article?
- The main claim is that while a junk-food tax is motivated by legitimate public-health goals and could reduce consumption and raise revenue, it also has important downsides (regressive impact on low-income households, uncertain effectiveness, industry avoidance) — so it should not be adopted uncritically; better-designed or complementary measures (targeted subsidies, education, clearer definitions, or broader policy mixes) are needed to make it fair and effective.