[teholbeddict]

I'm loving the new avatar Mez! That does it, I'm going out tonight to buy Goonies on dvd, I have to see it again!

[bubba]

from the kettle

[Aptorian]

 1231958661736.jpg (78.99K)
Number of downloads: 7

[Gwynn ap Nudd]

Mezla PigDog, on Jan 12 2009, 05:35 AM, said:

Frookenhauer, on Jan 11 2009, 09:35 PM, said:

Hey Mez! Live and let live? Fair enough, but being fat is not a good thing and should not some form of pressure from friends and family be encouraged?

I think it is safe to presume that overweight people know they are fat and know they should do something about it. If they choose not to, then it is up to them. While it is crappy for the tax payer when they clog up the health system, everyone does things that aren't good for them and if you are going to treat the overweight differently then to be consistent, you should do the same every time you see a person getting drunk or smoking.

In all seriousness, I'm sure any smoker with non-smoking friends or coworkers gets far more flac than the average over eater. I hear it often enough. I have never seen anyone look at an obese friend who has just ordered a pile of fried food and comment on how they are also killing themselves.

The smokers and drinkers also pay hefty taxes on thier vice of choice. In Canada at least, the average amount of cigarette taxes paid by a smoker over thier lifetime is much greater than the associated healthcare costs. Those who do not exercise and have poor diets are a burden on healthcare, as there are no taxes specifically on unhealthy foods.

[frookenhauer]

A fat tax?

"If your BMI is grater than XX.XX you will pay the new F.T.A. tax, thats the new Fatter Than Average tax."

Love your work Gwyn

[Slum]

Frookenhauer, on Jan 18 2009, 02:15 PM, said:

A fat tax?

"If your BMI is grater than XX.XX you will pay the new F.T.A. tax, thats the new Fatter Than Average tax."

Love your work Gwyn

Many employers in America are making their workers pay extra for health insurance if they're smokers and/or overweight...there's weight-loss seminars for the fatties to attend - if they can't prove they're making a genuine effort toward slimming down they have to pay more on their premium than skinny folks...

[frookenhauer]

GOOD. Its only fair.

[Slum]

Frookenhauer, on Jan 18 2009, 02:22 PM, said:

GOOD. Its only fair.

I'm sure the chubbers don't share that sentiment...

Really, what the hell? Why does a person with a fast metabolism get break while those that suffer with weight gain pay the piper?

I don't like morbid obesity any more than anyone else, but a person's employer should not impose restrictions on their lifestyle...

If a boss told me "Hey Slum, you gotta quit getting drunk and posting on the Malazan boards - it's just not attractive. Here's a pamphlet to help you be a better man." I would be pissed...

I guess, thinking about it, how could one NOT want to look their best? Really, there's a fine line between being yourself and killing yourself with your habits...


Wow, I think I contradicted myself there somewhere...oh well...

[Gwynn ap Nudd]

Slum Diggler, on Jan 18 2009, 11:43 AM, said:

Frookenhauer, on Jan 18 2009, 02:22 PM, said:

GOOD. Its only fair.

I'm sure the chubbers don't share that sentiment...

Really, what the hell? Why does a person with a fast metabolism get break while those that suffer with weight gain pay the piper?

I don't like morbid obesity any more than anyone else, but a person's employer should not impose restrictions on their lifestyle...

If a boss told me "Hey Slum, you gotta quit getting drunk and posting on the Malazan boards - it's just not attractive. Here's a pamphlet to help you be a better man." I would be pissed...

I guess, thinking about it, how could one NOT want to look their best? Really, there's a fine line between being yourself and killing yourself with your habits...


Wow, I think I contradicted myself there somewhere...oh well...

I agree that there are problems with collecting taxes or fees based on weight, especially using a measure such as BMI. Weight alone does not correlate with a healthy lifestyle, as Slum points out. In the case of taxes it would be overly intrusive and an absolute nightmare to implement, even if it was an accurate measure. However, I would have no problem with additional taxes being levied on certain types of food and drink.

I think an employer has every right to tell an employee they need to make lifestyle changes when thier current lifestyle impacts the employee's work. I'm sure my boss could care less if I have a few beers on a Friday, but drinking on a weeknight and showing up hungover is unacceptable. Even with a desk job, having out of shape employees is a detriment as it generally means more sick days - which costs the employer money.

And before someone calls me out on these comments I should clarify what I meant:

In all seriousness, I'm sure any smoker with non-smoking friends or coworkers gets far more flac than the average over eater. I hear it often enough. I have never seen anyone look at an obese friend who has just ordered a pile of fried food and comment on how they are also killing themselves.

I realise that the overweight do get tons ridicule for being overweight, but in my experience this usually about appearance and being unattractive. I am referring specifically to the health risks caused by being obese.

[frookenhauer]

I'm saying its fair because if you smoke pr are overweight the cost for medical insurance itself increases because the risk of claims increases and so its FAIR that the people who smoke and are overweight cough up the difference.

Can't say fairer than that.

[Terez]

Frookenhauer, on Jan 18 2009, 08:25 PM, said:

I'm saying its fair because if you smoke pr are overweight the cost for medical insurance itself increases because the risk of claims increases and so its FAIR that the people who smoke and are overweight cough up the difference.

It might be fair if there's not a metabolism issue or some other medical issue. If there is a metabolism/medical issue, that's like saying a diabetic should be charged more for insurance than a healthy person. Yeah, and overweight person can raise their metabolism by working out a lot. But is it fair to expect them to spend hours every week doing this when people with naturally high metabolisms don't have to? Regardless of the opinions in this thread, you don't have to eat abnormal amounts of food or be abnormally lazy to get fat. Not all fat people eat like birds in public and then munch when they get home. Not all fat people work desk jobs and then sit in front of the tube/computer all the time at home. In fact, lots of skinny people eat abnormal amounts of food which goes straight through them, and work desk jobs and then sit around in front of the tube/computer all the time at home.

This post has been edited by Terez: 19 January 2009 - 04:00 AM

[Gwynn ap Nudd]

Terez, on Jan 18 2009, 07:59 PM, said:

Frookenhauer, on Jan 18 2009, 08:25 PM, said:

I'm saying its fair because if you smoke pr are overweight the cost for medical insurance itself increases because the risk of claims increases and so its FAIR that the people who smoke and are overweight cough up the difference.

It might be fair if there's not a metabolism issue or some other medical issue. If there is a metabolism/medical issue, that's like saying a diabetic should be charged more for insurance than a healthy person. Yeah, and overweight person can raise their metabolism by working out a lot. But is it fair to expect them to spend hours every week doing this when people with naturally high metabolisms don't have to? Regardless of the opinions in this thread, you don't have to eat abnormal amounts of food or be abnormally lazy to get fat. Not all fat people eat like birds in public and then munch when they get home. Not all fat people work desk jobs and then sit in front of the tube/computer all the time at home. In fact, lots of skinny people eat abnormal amounts of food which goes straight through them, and work desk jobs and then sit around in front of the tube/computer all the time at home.

Which is why you tax unhealthy foods in systems with universal healthcare, not weight.

In terms of heakth insurance, try getting insurance with a congenital heart defect. Inherited conditions do effect rates, including many which cannot be "cured", especially by something as simple as exercise. Whether fair or not, increasing rates for the overweight is merely bringing standards in line with those used for other conditions.

[Terez]

Gwynn ap Nudd, on Jan 18 2009, 10:17 PM, said:

Which is why you tax unhealthy foods in systems with universal healthcare, not weight.

Which is why I disagreed with Frookie rather than you.

Gwynn said:

In terms of heakth insurance, try getting insurance with a congenital heart defect. Inherited conditions do effect rates, including many which cannot be "cured", especially by something as simple as exercise. Whether fair or not, increasing rates for the overweight is merely bringing standards in line with those used for other conditions.

Some other conditions, but not all. And I really disagree with the practice altogether, when it comes to something that can't be helped. It's a bit different for something like smoking, but being punished for having a genetic condition is beyond unfair. I realize that insurance companies are just trying to make a buck, but that's part of why I think that insurance should be in the hands of the government.

[Urb]

I'd love to see heavy taxes on soft drinks, chocolate, candy, chips, and all that stuff. There was actually one prominent politician over here who suggested it a while back, but it got pretty quiet after a day or two. I guess someone told her to shut up. Problem is unhealthy food is big business. And so long as the money is good, who cares if people get fat? I'd say if you can drag smoking down into the dirt and spit on it. Why not do the same with junk food?

Crappy food is cheap, and healty food is expensive. The result is a world where people get fat.

And it really pisses me off when I see these agressive "healthier than before" add campaigns ("only x% fat!", "diet soda, no sugar!", "less salt, better for you!", ...). They know people are impressionable, and make them think: "Oh! I can eat this, it's got almost no fat/sugar in it."

IT'S NOT HEALTHY!!! IT'S STILL COCA COLA!!! (or whatever else crap people think it's OK to drink/eat every day)

[Camel]

One of the things about being overweight is that you can do something about it. You don't have to be like someone on The Biggest Loser and lose 100 lbs in three months, but simply by cutting back on portion sizes and exercising a little every other night or so (and seriously, a little -- walking a mile takes about 20 minutes), you can lose a pound or so every week or two. In a year, that's 30-50 lbs! That's huge!

The biggest problem with being overweight is that it's a vicious cycle. You're overweight, and you know it, and you get depressed and insecure, so you eat because it makes you feel better, which, in turn, makes you gain more weight, which makes you depressed and insecure, so you eat because...

One thing to understand is that weight doesn't matter nearly as much as you think. Like I said in an earlier post, it's all about attitude and perception. There are some seriously gorgeous people out there who weigh half again as much as Jennifer Aniston, but the reason they look great at 180, 200lbs is because of their attitude. They dress and act like they're confident with themselves, and that makes them attractive.

If all you wear is baggy clothes to hide your fat, if you freak out when your boyfriend sees you naked, if you let yourself go to shit, then yes, you're ugly and I don't want anything to do with you.

But if you wear clothes that accentuate your best features, whether it's eyes or hair or teeth or boobs or whatever, and you act confident with yourself, then you'll be a thousand times more attractive.

And it's the latter that are successful at losing weight. They lose weight because they realize "Hey, I'm a great person and this weight is keeping others from realizing that." They don't sit around and mope and feel sorry for themselves because they're fat.

Wanna lose weight? Get a dog, walk it every night. Get a friend, walk together every night. One mile. Cut out one or two (that's it) of the super sugary things in your life, whether it's sweets or sodas or whatever, and add in one or two vegetables or fruits on a daily basis, and seriously, you'll start losing weight. It'll be slow if that's all you do, but at least it's progress. Just be sure to treat it like you would a taking a shower or brushing your teeth, something that you do every day, but not something to obsess about. Obsession can lead to burn-out real fast. Be patient.

[Illuyankas]

I do agree with the cutting out one or two sweet things part. First I switched the type of fizzy drinks I massively overdrank from normal to diet - it's still incredibly unhealthy, but I'm starting to like the carcinogens by now - and lost a stone; then I found out I was lactose and dairy intolerant and lost another stone cutting them out of my diet completely. Sure, the second one wasn't exactly voluntary, but it worked.

[Terez]

No cheese?



NO CHEESE?????

[frookenhauer]

Yes, he cleans his peepee properly too nowadays

( I think you can make cheese from alternate sources, but don't hold me to that...)

Diabetes, heart disease, stupidity, whatever. Anything that makes the premiums go up for the employer should be passed on, why the hell should they have to stump up the cash? If you cost more, pay more.

BTW I do like the tax on unhealthy food idea...Can't wait to see the look on Ronald Macdonalds face.

[Epiph]

Frookenhauer, on Jan 19 2009, 04:09 PM, said:

Diabetes, heart disease, stupidity, whatever. Anything that makes the premiums go up for the employer should be passed on, why the hell should they have to stump up the cash? If you cost more, pay more.

Because it just makes already unethical insurance more unethical? Because it's discrimination? Because someone at risk for diabetes has just as much right to affordable health care as someone with a family history of cancer? By all means, tax the cause of the condition, but if you charge the person, you are just as likely to be taxing ignorance as stupidity.

I know plenty of tall skinny dudes who eat way worse than slightly overweight but health conscious dudes. Making the changes necessary to lose weight and keep it off is difficult.

[Illuyankas]

Terez, on Jan 19 2009, 09:48 PM, said:

No cheese?



NO CHEESE?????

That's right. No cheese, so no pizza, no milk, no yoghurt, no cream, no ice cream, no chocolate...

Frankly I think I deserve the right to drink too much of my shitty fizzy drinks. Ah, well... at least I have chicken.