Should we tax overweight/obese people?

Auguste Comte

turbot wrote: »

BMI is an indicator

No BMI's don't have indicators.


I think that's what they say over on the motors forum anyways.

AudreyHepburn

I don’t think you can actually tax the person but I would have no problem with higher taxes on unhealthy foods/drinks and higher health insurance/ hospital bills/gp bills for those who are overweight and have health issues as a result.

Why should I as a perfectly person pay for some grossly overweight person too lazy to take some personal responsibility for themselves?

NSAman

Add a FAT seat tax on planes though... don't you just hate it when the Golightly Family sit beside you and the stomach spills over into your seat? and while the turbulence kicks it, its like having two plates of Jelly wobbling at your arms and rubbing you up?

odyssey06

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I don’t think you can actually tax the person but I would have no problem with higher taxes on unhealthy foods/drinks and higher health insurance/ hospital bills/gp bills for those who are overweight and have health issues as a result.
Why should I as a perfectly person pay for some grossly overweight person too lazy to take some personal responsibility for themselves?

People should take personal responsibility for themselves. Let's abolish all welfare, pensions and medical cards. You go to hospital, you pay with what you earned.
"If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat."

ILoveYourVibes

No bad for the economy.

Cee-Jay-Cee

Increasing or creating a tax to tackle anything in this country has never resulted in what it was intended for. It’s purely been a tax grab where none of the additional money raised was used to tackle the problem so no, taxing fat people is pointless.

I do think something should be done to tackle the ever increasing herd of fat people this country has but not by increasing tax. I do believe there should be some penalties for people who take no responsibility for their own or children’s health but in what form those penalties are imposed, I cannot say.

Grab All Association

Incentives for reducing carbohydrates/sugar in products. It’s carbohydrates that raise blood sugar which makes the pancreas release insulin which drives glucose into the cells where it used for energy . Excessive consumption of carbs leads to weight gain and insulin resistance and then type 2 diabetes. Type 2 diabetes is completely reversible by following keto/low carb lifestyle. My sister reversed hers completely 15 years after diagnosis. It’s the advice that’s wrong in this country. The HSE prescribes metformin to those diagnosed with T2. This lowers the blood sugars and requires the patient to consume even more carbs otherwise their blood sugar will drop too low (hypoglycemia)
Diabetes T2 is carbohydrate toxicity

Proper advice given on how to reverse T2 would save the HSE millions.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

14dMoney wrote: »

Well it's unfair to tax someone who lets say is very healthy, but every once in a while gets a can of coke, just because some people lack self control. A direct tax would be fairer and maybe teach some responsibility.

If someone only gets a can of coke the odd time, a surcharge is hardly going to cause hardship, is it?

As for responsibility, do only overweight folks lack self-control?

Dav010

Obesity can be multifactorial, but if you want to tax us, I think we should be able to tax stupid people as well, are you prepared to take the tax hit yourself?

Cee-Jay-Cee

Dav010 wrote: »

Obesity can be multifactorial, but if you want to tax us, I think we should be able to tax stupid people as well, are you prepared to take the tax hit yourself?

It’s easier to determine who is obese than it is determining stupidity although I do agree a ‘stupid tax’ would raise billions in this country.

Still waters

14dMoney wrote: »

Well it's unfair to tax someone who lets say is very healthy, but every once in a while gets a can of coke, just because some people lack self control. A direct tax would be fairer and maybe teach some responsibility.

that skinny cnut that's drinking the can of coke will probably live well into their 80s costing the state extra in pension/healthcare/grant aided disabled access toilets for the house, the fat fella will be dead by the time hes 75 saving the state a fortune

Plumbthedepths

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote:

Increasing or creating a tax to tackle anything in this country has never resulted in what it was intended for. It’s purely been a tax grab where none of the additional money raised was used to tackle the problem so no, taxing fat people is pointless.

The plastic bag tax was very effective. I remember seeing plastic bags all over the place not so much when people had to pay for them.

Thephantomsmask

Deebles McBeebles wrote: »

If you drive a car, I'll tax the street,
If you try to sit, I'll tax your seat.
If you get too cold I'll tax the heat,
If you take a walk, I'll tax your feet.

I guess George Harrison made the common mistake of calling it Road tax instead of motor tax

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

14dMoney wrote: »

Well it's unfair to tax someone who lets say is very healthy, but every once in a while gets a can of coke, just because some people lack self control. A direct tax would be fairer and maybe teach some responsibility.

Welcome to the world of tax. If you can just apply that logic to booze, we'll be sorted.

GarIT

The sugar tax is a really stupid idea. They are plenty of things that cause weight gain that have no sugar. Oils for example. The smarter thing to do would be to scrap the sugar tax and VAT on foods and tax foods based on calories instead. Maybe between 0.1c and 0.05c per calorie.

GarIT

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

School holidays. ;-)

Nah, its the heat

GarIT

NSAman wrote: »

Add a FAT seat tax on planes though... don't you just hate it when the Golightly Family sit beside you and the stomach spills over into your seat? and while the turbulence kicks it, its like having two plates of Jelly wobbling at your arms and rubbing you up?

That's simplier than weighing people as is often suggested. Put a weight limit on economy seats and only permit fat people to buy business class tickets.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

GarIT wrote: »

That's simplier than weighing people as is often suggested. Put a weight limit on economy seats and only permit fat people to buy business class tickets.

Wait - I have to be fat before I can fly business??

GarIT

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Wait - I have to be fat before I can fly business??

:pac: I meant fat people should only be allowed buy the wider business seats not that only fat people should be allowed to buy them.

Galwayguy35

Looking at old albums at home it's rare that any of the people in the photos were overweight so it must be that these days people are eating more and moving less.

It's easy to solve without taxing anyone, eat less and get off their arse and exercise.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

kunst nugget wrote: »

Seriously, just tax unhealthy food. If you only indulge occasionally, it's not going to hurt the pocket badly but it'll make more and more of a dent the more of an unhealthy prick you are.

Exactly.

con___manx1

14dMoney wrote: »

Well it's unfair to tax someone who lets say is very healthy, but every once in a while gets a can of coke, just because some people lack self control. A direct tax would be fairer and maybe teach some responsibility.

If they only have a can of coke once and a while its not gonna break the bank. I would be one of those people who drink it in moderation so i would have no issue with it being taxed to the hilt.
Its the fat kids im thinking of. It will cost the parents alot more to buy them that crap all the time.

Airyfairy12

Instead of overly taxing unhealthy food, healthy food should be cheaper and more accessible.
organic meet costs substantially more than a box of processed chicken nuggets or burgers and you could buy two weeks+ worth of unhealthy food to feed a family for what it costs to buy a weeks worth of healthy food.
Unhealthy food also lasts longer, saving more money, most fresh healthy fruit and veg goes off within a couple of days to a week. It isnt sufficient to keep a low income family fed on a healthy diet.

kyote00

maybe lets tax water .... oh wait....

Capt'n Midnight

And what's the story for pregnant women or conjoined twins ?

Wanderer2010

I haven't read the whole thread but this seems like way too simplistic a solution to the obesity crisis and especially in our compo culture, how long would it be before someone who was obese and refused a plane seat or was humiliated trying to take their seat, would lodge a complaint for psychological trauma and tie the courts up for months, no doubt winning a fortune in the process, opening the floodlights for similar claims.

I can certainly see the logic behind tax, given the scary predictions and trends for how obesity is going to bankrupt the HSE in the next few decades but if it were as simple as taxing, the issue would be solved by now. The fact is every single person has a different relationship with food- some don't think of it outside of meals, others have sedentary lifestyles and the weight creeps on slowly, more still have mental problems and turn to food to satisfy emotional needs, setting up a vicious cycle of binge and purge etc. Really, education on nutrition needs to start young in schools where kids are thought what healthy eating means, what happens if you eat too much and what eating disorders are etc.


A more educated approach to this issue is really the only way to curtail it. Taxing someone who is too heavy to fly solves nothing- that person will turn to food for comfort and the whole cycle starts again. Look at the sugar tax- that was a knee jerk action that did NOTHING to prevent obesity. If people want sugar they will buy sugar end of story.

Fann Linn

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

And what's the story for pregnant women or conjoined twins ?

Tax them twice or 3 or 4 times.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Fann Linn wrote: »

Tax them twice or 3 or 4 times.

I don;t think he meant a woman pregnant WITH conjoined twins!

Fann Linn

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I don;t think he meant a woman pregnant WITH conjoined twins!

This is AH after all!

ToddyDoody

I think we need to tax stupidity first.