Raising tTaxes oOn uUnhealthy bBehaviors

In English, titles are capitalized. There are two ways. The easier way is to capitalize every word.

The listening content totalsection completely refutes the reading passage in the fac's claim/thesis/argument that imposeing high taxes on cigarettes and unhealthy food can benefit society/can be a benefit tof society.

Listening section/segment/part/portion are all acceptable alternatives. "Totally" is too informal for the tone of this writing exercise.

First of all, the reading mentions that raising taxes on unhealthy behaviors discourages people from doing itengaging in them/practicing them.

I know, English is annoying about this. In the "that" clause, "raising taxes" is the subject. It's a gerund noun, which is always singular, so "discourages" needs an "s." Also, you can "engage in unhealthy behaviors" or "practice unhealthy behaviors."

Take cigarettes for example,For example, it says that smoking has declinesd since taxes on cigarettes have risen.

"It" refers to the reading passage.

Also,It also states/says/asserts that imposeing taxes on unhealthy food can help reduce the obesity rate.

The listening segment, however, argues that the policy of higher taxes does not lead to healthier behavior, f. For example, high cigarettes taxes lead people to buy cheaper and low quality cigarettes which contain more unhealthy substances.

Similarly, even though imposit [the listening segment] mentions that despite high taxes imposed on unhealthy food, some people might continue to spend more money on unhealthy food, which they prefer, so it would nothe policy doesn't benefit their health.

Secondly, the reading suggests that people who do theengage in unhealthy behaviors increase medical costs that armust be covered by everyone who pays taxes.

Taxing people who do theengage in unhealthy behaviors creates extra income that can be used to cover the increased medical costs, so that people, such as nonsmokers, can pursue a financially fair aren't penalized.

Yet, the speaker from the listening passage points out the fact that taxes on unhealthy products are unfair because they do not take into account t people’s income.

Suppose a high-earning person and lower- earning person consume the same amountnumber of cigarettes a day.

Remember: use "number" for things you can count and "amount" for quantities you can't.

Paying a high taxes will create a greater burden for the lower earner than for the higher earner.

Lastly, the author of the reading passage says that imposeing high taxes on tobacco increases revenue for the government.

The government can use the money to benefit the public welfare.

In contrast, the listening portion asserts that the government uses of theis revenue that has a downside.

The government does not want to lose the millions of dollars in its budget, so it might not forchesitate to pursuinge policies or laws tohat eliminate unhealthy behaviors.

For instance, it will allow people to smoke in public areas, such as parks, since it does not want to lose the additional income.

The listening content totally refutecontradicts the reading passage in the fact that imposeits stance on whether or not the imposition of high taxes on cigarettes and unhealthy food can be benefit of society.

Are you answering a prompt or something? Just referencing "listening content" and "reading passage" seems very out of the blue without that context, but of course it's fine if that is the case! Also, you need to make it clear here from the start which source takes which position on this issue.

First of all, the readingpassage mentions that raising taxes on unhealthy behaviors discourages people from doing itengaging in them.

Take cigarettes, for example, s. Smoking has declinesd since taxes on cigarettes have risen.

Also, imposeing taxes on unhealthy food can help reduce obesity rates.

The listening, however, argues that the policy of higher taxes does not lead to healthier behavior, f. For example, high cigarettes taxes lead people to buy cheaper and lower quality cigarettes, which contain more unhealthy substances.

Similarly, even though governments might impose high taxes on unhealthy food, some people might disregard that and continue to spend moretheir money on unhealthy food which they preferthose foods, so it would not benefit their health.

Secondly, the reading suggests that people who do thepartake in unhealthy behaviors increase medical costs that are covered by everyone who pays taxes, which are then covered by taxpayer money.

Taxing people who do theengage in unhealthy behaviors creates extra income that can be used to cover the medical costs, so people, such as nonsmokers, can pursue a financially fair. This is financially fair to people like nonsmokers.

Yet, the speaker from the listening passage points out the fact that taxes on unhealthy products are unfair because they do not take into account t people’s' income.

Suppose a high-earning person and lower- earning person consume the same amount of cigarettes a day.

Paying a high taxes will create a greater burden for the lower earner than the higher earner.

LastFinally, the author says that imposeing high taxes on tobacco increases tax revenue for the government.

You don't need to say "for the government" since taxes as typically collected by the government.

In contrast, the listening asserts that the government might not uses theat revenue that has aas one might expect, creating an potential downside.

The government does not want to lose the million dollarincome from the aforementioned taxes, so ithey might not force toactively pursuinge policies or law tos focused on eliminateing unhealthy behaviors.

For instance, it willthe government might allow people to smoke in public areas, such as parks, since it does not want too they will not lose theat income.