# data[].attributes.body
Marginal Principle: The Marginal principle is how one makes choices a step at a time or in other words a meal at a time. The articles go over weighing the costs of dining out vs the time it can potentially save. Someone may consider cooking at home and saving money if they feel like the money spent on eating out is too much. Someone's specific scenario when choosing what to do comes down to what they feel is more valuable at the moment, whether if it saving dollars or saving minutes.

Opportunity Cost: Consumers consider weighing the costs to the benefits of choosing fast food over cooking. Some costs may be money, time and or health. Those who live in high-income states, may consider eating out for the eating out as the opportunity cost of time may be considerably higher compared to low-income states.

# data[].attributes.body
The US News article talks about whether or not it is cheaper to cook at home or eat out at a fast food restaurant. It also brings up the cost of actually making the meal with considering the time at the grocery store, shopping, and cooking the meal. For individuals who value time over money, this article concludes that fast food may make more sense. However, you also have to consider the health consequences of constantly eating fast food because it is proven that it is typically unhealthy and does not provide proper nutrition. Ultimately this article concludes it depends on the individual’s lifestyle and values when deciding between the pros and cons of eating out and making food at home.

# data[].attributes.body
The TNC article concludes that cooking at home is significantly cheaper than eating out. It outlines some pros of cooking at home such as nutrition and portion control, and that cooking is a useful skill. However, there are some cons as cooking does take much longer to prepare and can be a challenging skill to learn. Eating out on the other hand provides convenience and restaurant quality food. The article compares the price difference from eating out and cooking at home in each state and on average cooking at home saves about $12 per meal.

# data[].attributes.headline
Application of the Equilibrium Model: Tax on Fast Food

# data[].attributes.subject
Application of the Equilibrium Model: Tax on Fast Food

# data[].attributes.body
Implications of a Tax on Fast Food

supply curve shifts to the left

reduced quantity

higher price

deadweight loss is created due to reduced quantity

# data[].attributes.body
We would not implement a tax on fast food

If prices go up, this can limit food accessibility to lower income families

Limit people’s options if they need a quick, cheap meal on the go

People may find substitutions to other unhealthy at home meals

# data[].attributes.headline
Watch this short clip to learn more about potential impacts of a tax on fast food

# data[].attributes.subject
Watch this short clip to learn more about potential impacts of a tax on fast food

# data[].attributes.body
Key Takeaways

lower income families are affected disproportionately

there are other ways the government can influence healthier options

subsidize healthy foods

stop subsidizing unhealthy foods like corn syrup

more resources to build things like parks and gyms

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Would a fast food tax improve public health?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new public health study suggests populations who suffer disproportionately from obesity, diabetes and heart disease could gain health benefits from policies that put fast food prices beyond their reach. http://www.umassmed.edu/news/2014/research/would-fast-food-tax-improve-public-health.aspx "As prices of fast food go up, everybody eats a little bit less fast food, but people with fewer economic resources are influenced much more by the price than people who have more resources," said Catarina Kiefe, MD, PhD.

# data[].attributes.body
Positive analysis:

Cooking at home costs substantially less than eating out: $4.23 for a home-cooked meal vs. $16.28 for a restaurant meal.

Compared to eating out, home-cooked meals offer better nutritional value and quantity control.

Normative analysis:

Cooking at home gives people greater financial and nutritional control, so it gives people an easier way to save time and money.

Some people may value convenience, social benefits, and access to expertly cooked meals more than financial savings while dining out.

Conclusion Regarding the Effectiveness of the Policy:

Cooking at home is more economical and nutritious.

Eating out produces convenience seekers and drives restaurants and also those who must make nutritional compromises and pay higher prices

While dining out sometimes offers social and experiential value, encouraging home cooking can improve public health and financial well-being

# data[].attributes.body
Cost Analysis: Cooking at home is still way less expensive than eating out

The average cost of a home-cooked dinner is about $4.23, and the average cost of a cheap restaurant is $16.28 which is a 285% cost increase.

Savings by State: The biggest difference is found in New York, where residents save about $19.40 on meals prepared at home as opposed to eating out.

The economic benefit of cooking at home is demonstrated by the fact that choosing to do so can save a person over $13,000 annually.

Dietary and Nutritional Control: For people with certain dietary requirements, home cooking provides improved portion control and nutrition management.

# data[].attributes.body
Major food chains control the fast food industry. Such as McDonalds, Taco Bell, Subway, etc. With the mass control of the industry. Consumers risk facing the consequence of higher prices and lower-quality products

These factors affect both the supply and demand of the market. Consumers will change their preferences based on the quality and price. While producers will continue to change their prices and quality to make the most profit.

Externalities: The consumption of fast food, can lead to a negative externality of obesity with the lower quality of product for a larger gain on revenue for these corporations.

Unintended Consequences: Increased spending on fast food rather than making food at home. With the corporation's power to change the price with market inflation.

# data[].attributes.body
Price Elasticity: The author Nicolette Star Maggiolo mentions the different costs of living in different states. Eating out more often can be the result of groceries being more expensive and vice versa. More people may choose to cook at home if eating out becomes too expensive, depending on how sensitive people are to the changing price of food.

Scarcity: In the case of choosing fast food, time and money can be considered a limited resource. If someone views their time as a scarce resource then it might make sense to pick fast food for its efficiency.