TPO53

Directions: You have 20 minutes to plan and write your response. Your response will be judged on the basis of the quality of your writing and on how well your response presents the points in the lecture and their relationship to the reading passage. Typically, an effective response will be 150 to 225 words.

Reading Part

Many countries require cigarette smokers to pay particularly high taxes on their purchases of cigarettes; similar taxes are being considered for unhealthy foods. The policy of imposing high taxes on cigarettes and other unhealthy products has a number of social benefits.

First of all, the taxes discourage people from indulging in unhealthy behaviors. Raising taxes on cigarettes, for instance, leads people to buy fewer of them. Smoking has declined as taxes on tobacco have risen, showing that these taxes do work to make society healthier. It can be expected that imposing similar taxes on unhealthy food and beverages would help reduce obesity rates.

Second, taxes of this kind are financially fair. When people get sick as a result of their smoking or eating unhealthy foods, they create medical costs. It is unfair that everyone in the society, including nonsmokers and people who follow a healthy diet, should contribute equally to covering these costs. Taxing people who engage in unhealthy behaviors creates extra income that can be used to cover the medical costs. In this way, some of the financial burden is shifted from all of society to just those who choose to participate in the unhealthy activities.

Finally, the high rate of taxation on cigarettes significantly increases revenue for the government. In addition to using this tax revenue on medical assistance, governments often use the revenue for other projects that benefit public welfare, such as building stadiums or creating public parks. Even basic government-supported services like public education benefit from these taxes. Thus, the taxes on cigarettes, and the proposed taxes on unhealthy foods, benefit everyone.

Listening Part

Directions: Now listen to a part of a lecture on the topic you just read about.

Each of the arguments about the benefits of cigarette and other such taxes can be challenged.

First, these taxes don’t necessarily lead to healthier behavior. For instance, high cigarette taxes have led some smokers to buy cheaper lower quality cigarettes. Such cigarettes typically contain even more harmful substances than better quality cigarettes and present even greater health risks. Similarly, imagine how some consumers might react to higher taxes on unhealthy foods. They might continue buying the unhealthy foods they prefer even if they’re more expensive. And as a result, have less money left to spend on healthy foods. That certainly wouldn’t benefit their health.

Second, there are different ways of thinking about fairness. It might seem fair for people indulging in unhealthy behaviors to pay for the consequences of those behaviors through high taxes. But some people would argue that these taxes are unfair, because they don’t take into account people’s incomes. If a high-earning person and a lower-earning person are addicted to cigarettes and each smokes a pack of cigarettes a day. Paying the tax would be a greater expense for the low earner relative to his or her income. The same argument applies to the food taxes. So many people believe that these taxes are not fair because they create a much greater burden for those with smaller incomes than for those with higher incomes.

Finally, the fact that governments can use this tax revenue for various projects has the downside. This income represents millions and millions of dollars and governments become dependent on it and don’t want to lose it. In consequence, the governments might not be forceful enough pursuing policies and implementing laws that might eliminate unhealthy habits altogether. For example, they are unlikely to adopt radical measure such as not allowing smoking in outdoor public areas such as parks or even banning smoking in all outdoor areas, public or private, because they don’t want to lose this income.

参考笔记

Question

Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific points made in the reading passage.

Model Essay

某托福小课范文

The reading passage supports imposing high taxes on unhealthy food and cites several benifits, while the listening passage challenged all the benefits the author cited.

First, the reading passage argues that high taxes would discourage people from buying unhealthy food, while the speaker refutes that raising taxes may cause more health risks. For example, people who smoke will buy more cheaper cigarettes instead, which contain more harmful substances would do more harm to their health. What is more, some people may insist on buying unhealthy food. As a result, they would have less money on healthy food.

Second, the author holds that the policy of raising taxes of unhealthy food is financially fair for the society whereas the listening passage fights aganist that by claiming that this policy creates burden to lower-income levels who are addicted to smoking or consuming unhealthy food, they should pay the same taxes. This would not be as financially fair as the reading claimed.

Third, higher taxes would bring higher tax revenue for the government,, and the government can make good use of it on public welfare. However, the speaker cites the downside that a huge amount of tax income would make the government dependent on it and fell reluctant to implement policies and laws to eliminate the consumption of unhealthy food. For example, forbidding smoking in public areas would become hard to enforce for the government.

232 words

这个范文词汇有点过于简单，来参考一下GPT-3.5美化后的效果：

The provided reading passage fervently advocates for the imposition of elevated taxes on unhealthy food items, enumerating various advantages, while the listening passage critically contests each of these purported benefits.

First and foremost, the reading passage contends that augmenting taxes would deter individuals from purchasing unhealthy food, a point vigorously contradicted by the speaker. The speaker posits that escalating taxes may inadvertently exacerbate health risks. For instance, individuals who indulge in smoking may resort to acquiring cheaper, lower-quality cigarettes, thereby exposing themselves to even more pernicious substances, culminating in graver health consequences. Moreover, there is the plausible scenario where some consumers steadfastly cling to their preference for unhealthy food. Consequently, this tax hike would leave them with diminished financial resources to allocate towards wholesome dietary choices.

Secondly, the author posits that this taxation policy embodies financial equity for society. However, the listening passage vehemently disputes this perspective, asserting that it places an inequitable burden on lower-income individuals who are ensnared in the grip of smoking or the consumption of unhealthy food. The contention is that regardless of income level, individuals addicted to these behaviors are obligated to pay identical taxes, thus rendering this fiscal approach less financially equitable than the reading purports.

Lastly, the reading passage underscores that heightened taxes would result in a substantial windfall for the government, to be judiciously employed for the betterment of public welfare. The speaker, however, contends that there is a downside to this fiscal dependency. The colossal influx of tax revenue could potentially lead to a governmental reliance that hampers the enactment of robust policies and laws aimed at curtailing the consumption of unhealthy food. For instance, stringent prohibitions on smoking in public areas may become challenging to enforce due to the government's reluctance to forgo the significant income generated from these taxes.

300 words

gpt-4-1106-preview api版本

The article strongly advocates the imposition of higher taxes on unhealthy foods, highlighting a number of benefits from such a policy. In contrast, the lecture casts doubt on each of the benefits mentioned by the reading, presenting a counterargument to the claims made.

To begin with, the reading suggests that elevated taxation on unhealthy food items would serve as a deterrent, discouraging consumers from making such purchases. On the other hand, the speaker contends that higher taxes might inadvertently lead to greater health risks. For instance, consumers of tobacco might opt for less expensive, more harmful cigarette brands as a result of raised taxes, further endangering their health. Furthermore, there is the possibility that some individuals will persist in their unhealthy food choices despite increased costs, thereby reducing their financial capacity to afford healthier alternatives.

Additionally, the author puts forth the notion that taxing unhealthy foods more heavily is a socially equitable financial approach. This view is contested by the lecture, which argues that such a policy disproportionately burdens lower-income groups who may be more likely to smoke or consume unhealthy food, as they would incur the same level of taxation. This stands in contrast to the initial claim of financial fairness.

Lastly, the article posits that higher taxes on such foods would generate increased revenue for the government, which could then be allocated towards public welfare initiatives. However, it is pointed out by the lecturer that substantial tax income could foster a dependency within the government, making it less inclined to pursue measures aimed at reducing the consumption of unhealthy foods. The lecture cites the potential difficulty in enforcing regulations like smoking bans in public places, given the government's reliance on the revenue generated by taxes on such activities.

By presenting a nuanced examination of the proposed tax policy's implications, the speaker effectively challenges the reading's assertions, thereby provoking a deeper consideration of the issue at hand.

318 words

对比一下小站托福的答辩范文，400多词怎么用？

In the reading passage, the author lists three reasons to prove there are many social benefits of imposing high taxes upon cigarettes as well as other unhealthy products. However, the professor in the listening contends that each of the arguments about the benefits of the cigarette and other such taxes can be challenged.

Firstly, the reading passage claims that high taxes could prevent people from unhealthy behaviors, but the professor argues that these taxes don't necessarily lead to healthy behaviors. For instance, heavy taxes can lead some smokers to buy cheaper and lower quality cigarettes. Such cigarettes typically contain even more harmful substances than better quality cigarettes, and present even greater health risks. Similarly, imagine how some consumers might react to same taxes on unhealthy foods. They might continue buying the unhealthy foods they prefer even if it's more expensive, and as a result, have less money left to spend on healthy foods. That certainly wouldn't benefit their health.

Secondly, in the reading passage, it is said that this kind of taxes are financially fair. On the contrary, the professor hold the opinion that there are different ways of thinking about fairness. It might seem fair for people indulging in unhealthy behaviors to pay for the consequences of those behaviors through high taxes, but some people would argue that these taxes are unfair, because they don't take into account people's incomes. If a higher earning person and a lower earning person are addicted to cigarettes, and each smokes a pack of cigarettes a day, paying the tax would be a greater expense for the lower earner relative to his or her income. The same argument applies to the food taxes, so many people believe these taxes are not fair, because they create a much greater burden for those with lower incomes than for those with higher incomes.

Finally, according to the reading passage, such kind of high taxation could increase revenue for the government, while the professor maintains that the fact governments can use these tax revenues for various projects has a downside. This income represents millions and millions of dollars, and governments become dependent on it and don't want to lose it. In consequence, the governments might not be forceful enough pursuing policies and implementing laws that might eliminate unhealthy habits all together. For example, they are unlikely to adopt radical measures such as not allowing smoking in outdoor public areas such as parks, or even banning smoking in all outdoor areas public or private, because they don't want to lose this income.

424 words

封面图，来自SDXL：原始prompt为：悲伤的，愤怒的，Many countries require cigarette smokers to pay particularly high taxes on their purchases of cigarettes（后面经过了自动的翻译和增加）