Why Should People Be Ticketed And When They Waste Food
Topic:People should be ticketed and/or fined whenever they waste food.
Thesis: People should be ticketed and/or fined when they waste food because, the amount of money we waste on food that will eventually up in landfills is extremely high, yet billions of people do not have the resources that allow them to have at least one meal a day, and we ultimately produce methane when our wasted food ends up in landfill. Yet considering these reasons, people around the world still recklessly produce, and purchase more food than they could even think of consuming.
Premise: We purchase more food than we could even think of consuming, and end up throwing it away because we think it is no longer good to use because of best by, or use by labels.
Evidence: …show more content…
Humans are already a major cause of global warming, the main reason being the excess amount of CO2 we produce. When we waste food, it decomposes into methane, a toxic gas, which is more powerful than CO2.
Objections:
People could argue that they do not intentionally waste food, however they buy food they know they will not use, they could take a shopping list, and only buy things they need, regardless if there is a deal or not.
People could argue that they are scared of donating food because it could cause greater harm than good, such as food poisoning, however they would be covered through the good samaritan law.
Some people could argue that humans are not the cause of global warming, but all scientific evidence proves otherwise, the food we throw away is only contributing more.
Conclusion:
Although all of these reasons are enough for people to stop wasting food, the only way they would actually stop is if there is a consequence that affects them personally, and quickly. Fining, or ticketing someone would prevent them from wasting food, because the impact would be instant.
Kant’s Categorical Imperative
Thesis: People should be ticketed and/or fined when they waste food because, the amount of money we waste on food that will eventually up in landfills is extremely high, yet billions of people do not have the resources that allow them to have at least one meal a day, and we ultimately produce methane when our wasted food ends up in landfill. Yet considering these reasons, people around the world still recklessly produce, and purchase more food than they could even think of consuming.
Premise: We purchase more food than we could even think of consuming, and end up throwing it away because we think it is no longer good to use because of best by, or use by labels.
Evidence: …show more content…
Humans are already a major cause of global warming, the main reason being the excess amount of CO2 we produce. When we waste food, it decomposes into methane, a toxic gas, which is more powerful than CO2.
Objections:
People could argue that they do not intentionally waste food, however they buy food they know they will not use, they could take a shopping list, and only buy things they need, regardless if there is a deal or not.
People could argue that they are scared of donating food because it could cause greater harm than good, such as food poisoning, however they would be covered through the good samaritan law.
Some people could argue that humans are not the cause of global warming, but all scientific evidence proves otherwise, the food we throw away is only contributing more.
Conclusion:
Although all of these reasons are enough for people to stop wasting food, the only way they would actually stop is if there is a consequence that affects them personally, and quickly. Fining, or ticketing someone would prevent them from wasting food, because the impact would be instant.
Kant’s Categorical Imperative