Hippy Hamburgers!

[Vuk]

Ok, this is the way I see it. If Obama wants to put big taxes on fat people (like my incredibly sexy self), then why do hippies and college students get away? The sexually promiscuous tax the health care system just as much, so why not make hippies and college students pay a whore-tax? Really, think how much it costs to get them shots, diagnose their STDs, treat their STDs, and take care of other related health care problems. I guarantee you that if you set it high enough we could have a whole country of grumpy old conservatives.
Or, instead of just saving money, we could save AND make money at the same time! Obama could have all hippies and college students rounded-up, ground-up, and served-up! I bet that hippy burgers would be a big hit with conservatives! We could at least count on Dick Cheney to eat one!

Seriously though, if you are gonna tax the gluttons like me, then why not the really promiscuous people? Why not those who have a long history of accidents? Why not for those who work in dangerous occupations? Those who live in dangerous parts of the country? Those who play dangerous sports? Those who do not eat their 5 a day and get enough sleep? Those darned liberals? etc?! *pants*
And just so you know, the only time I have used health insurance is when I was skin and bones. I started getting fat after I developed tendinitis. I may be fat and like to eat a lot, but I have not taxed the health care system one bit. Why would I have to pay more?

[gaelic cowboy]

Ok, this is the way I see it. If Obama wants to put big taxes on fat people (like my incredibly sexy self), then why do hippies and college students get away? The sexually promiscuous tax the health care system just as much, so why not make hippies and college students pay a whore-tax? Really, think how much it costs to get them shots, diagnose their STDs, treat their STDs, and take care of other related health care problems. I guarantee you that if you set it high enough we could have a whole country of grumpy old conservatives.
Or, instead of just saving money, we could save AND make money at the same time! Obama could have all hippies and college students rounded-up, ground-up, and served-up! I bet that hippy burgers would be a big hit with conservatives! We could at least count on Dick Cheney to eat one!

Seriously though, if you are gonna tax the gluttons like me, then why not the really promiscuous people? Why not those who have a long history of accidents? Why not for those who work in dangerous occupations? Those who live in dangerous parts of the country? Those who play dangerous sports? Those who do not eat their 5 a day and get enough sleep? Those darned liberals? etc?! *pants*
And just so you know, the only time I have used health insurance is when I was skin and bones. I started getting fat after I developed tendinitis. I may be fat and like to eat a lot, but I have not taxed the health care system one bit. Why would I have to pay more?

Goes to make big long post on diabetes and obesity then decides its a waste of time.

[Ronin]

the population of your country (and also mine and every other industrialized) is getting increasingly old due in part to the fact that lots of people nowadays don´t want to have kids...

so in a way sexual behaviour should be seen as a plus..

[Sarmatian]

Vuk, a linky would be nice...

[lars573]

Ok, this is the way I see it. If Obama wants to put big taxes on fat people (like my incredibly sexy self), then why do hippies and college students get away? The sexually promiscuous tax the health care system just as much, so why not make hippies and college students pay a whore-tax? Really, think how much it costs to get them shots, diagnose their STDs, treat their STDs, and take care of other related health care problems. I guarantee you that if you set it high enough we could have a whole country of grumpy old conservatives.
Or, instead of just saving money, we could save AND make money at the same time! Obama could have all hippies and college students rounded-up, ground-up, and served-up! I bet that hippy burgers would be a big hit with conservatives! We could at least count on Dick Cheney to eat one!

Seriously though, if you are gonna tax the gluttons like me, then why not the really promiscuous people? Why not those who have a long history of accidents? Why not for those who work in dangerous occupations? Those who live in dangerous parts of the country? Those who play dangerous sports? Those who do not eat their 5 a day and get enough sleep? Those darned liberals? etc?! *pants*
And just so you know, the only time I have used health insurance is when I was skin and bones. I started getting fat after I developed tendinitis. I may be fat and like to eat a lot, but I have not taxed the health care system one bit. Why would I have to pay more?

Because it's still socially accepable to discriminate against fat people. Persons who aren't white, or jewish, or female were lost 30 years ago. Physically disabled 15-20 years ago. Homosexuals and muslims are in the process of being added to the list, and will probably be completed in the next generation. That leaves fat people, and you's guy's chubby shoulders have gotta carry societies rage and angst. Have fun.

[Fragony]

Big trees catch more wind deal with it bubba. Now I don't believe in taxing people into shape but obese people cost more money, so imho they should pay more insurance. Just as smokers should. Some people can't help being fat, doctor can diagnose. That might be cold but fair usually is. Better anyway than to be pushed into the sea by greenpeace, with the best inentions.

[HoreTore]

Because even with the negative aspects, sex is good for your health.

Very good in fact.

[Vuk]

Big trees catch more wind deal with it bubba. Now I don't believe in taxing people into shape but obese people cost more money, so imho they should pay more insurance. Just as smokers should. Some people can't help being fat, doctor can diagnose. That might be cold but fair usually is. Better anyway than to be pushed into the sea by greenpeace, with the best inentions.

Come on Frag, you could say the same thing about Jocks! (or people who do dangerous work)
That is ridiculous. How is it fair when I don't cost the health care system a cent, yet will have to pay through my nose? That is hardly fair. I tell you what though Frag, if we make fat people and smokers pay more, how about drinkers? That causes a stew of health problems as well. And who is to determine what is too fat and what is not? How about the government sticking their noses out of things, and not trying to run health care?

And Frag, if it is about who costs more, what does it matter if they can help it or not if it is that simple calculation? What if one race had more medical problems than another, would you agree to making one race pay more? How about one sex? I think it is a slippery slope of discrimination.

But even if it does not get applied to things that people cannot help, such as race or gender, how is it 'fair' when you tax one thing that cost the system more, but not the other? That is discrimination. If you were going to be fair you would have to tax any one who had sex outside of a single, monogamous relationship. You would have to tax the heck out of martial artists, athletes, computer programmers (still haven't met one yet who has not developed either carpal tunnel or an eye condition), people who do not get their proper daily exercise and eat healthy foods, etc.

And yeah, that is a big thing. I eat a lot and have gotten fat, but for the most part, what I eat is very healthy (including lots of fruit and vegetables), which is why I have a good cholesterol level, good heart rate, good blood pressure, and am in all respects but weight extremely healthy. I know people though who are not fat, but eat very unhealthy foods, never exercise, choose to live very stressful lives, subject their ears to really loud music at concerts, some smoke dope, and all in all they are extremely unhealthy and abound with health problems. I on the other hand am fat and happy, but without those health problems. How is it fair then that I am healthy (comparatively) and they are not, they cost the system a lot and I don't, and yet I should pay through my nose and they should not? Old saying goes "it is not so much how much you eat as what you eat". The government cannot determine things like that (unless they are gonna monitor how often people eat at fast food joins and you will need a federal license to buy a Twinkie), so how can they ever make it fair? They will just make it more unfair.


Oh, and by the way, though my income some times has been below the poverty line :P, I have always paid my own medical bills. Seems pretty unfair that a guy like me should be taxed up the *** because Obama cannot figure out how to pay for gargantuan health care takeover.

EDIT: PARAGRAPHS! YIPEE!

[Fragony]

Come on Frag, you could say the same thing about Jocks! (or people who do dangerous work)
That is ridiculous. How is it fair when I don't cost the health care system a cent, yet will have to pay through my nose? That is hardly fair. I tell you what though Frag, if we make fat people and smokers pay more, how about drinkers? That causes a stew of health problems as well. And who is to determine what is too fat and what is not? How about the government sticking their noses out of things, and not trying to run health care? And Frag, if it is about who costs more, what does it matter if they can help it or not if it is that simple calculation? What if one race had more medical problems than another, would you agree to making one race pay more? How about one sex? I think it is a slippery slope of discrimination. But even if it does not get applied to things that people cannot help, such as race or gender, how is it 'fair' when you tax one thing that cost the system more, but not the other? That is discrimination. If you were going to be fair you would have to tax any one who had sex outside of a single, monogamous relationship. You would have to tax the heck out of martial artists, athletes, computer programmers (still haven't met one yet who has not developed either carpal tunnel or an eye condition), people who do not get their proper daily exercise and eat healthy foods, etc. And yeah, that is a big thing. I eat a lot and have gotten fat, but for the most part, what I eat is very healthy (including lots of fruit and vegetables), which is why I have a good cholesterol level, good heart rate, good blood pressure, and am in all respects but weight extremely healthy. I know people though who are not fat, but eat very unhealthy foods, never exercise, choose to live very stressful lives, subject their ears to really loud music at concerts, some smoke dope, and all in all they are extremely unhealthy and abound with health problems. I on the other hand am fat and happy, but without those health problems. How is it fair then that I am healthy (comparatively) and they are not, they cost the system a lot and I don't, and yet I should pay through my nose and they should not? Old saying goes "it is not so much how much you eat as what you eat". The government cannot determine things like that (unless they are gonna monitor how often people eat at fast food joins and you will need a federal license to buy a Twinkie), so how can they ever make it fair? They will just make it more unfair.
Oh, and by the way, though my income some times has been below the poverty line :P, I have always paid my own medical bills. Seems pretty unfair that a guy like me should be taxed up the *** because Obama cannot figure out how to pay for gargantuan health care takeover.

I personally feel we should also tax the lack of sections in very very large texts.

typical.

[Vuk]

I personally feel we should also tax the lack of sections in very very large texts.

typical.

Paragraphs are for hippy leftist scum!

[Sarmatian]

Now I don't believe in taxing people into shape but obese people cost more money, so imho they should pay more insurance. Just as smokers should.

Smokers already pay huge tax when they buy cigarettes. I don't see why another should be added.

That would also be applicable to food. Heavy tax on unhealthy food, no more 3$ meals in McDonald's. If people were to pay 15$ for a meal, they wouldn't go there so much. Taxing fat people more is... complicated and can easily backfire.

[Vuk]

Smokers already pay huge tax when they buy cigarettes. I don't see why another should be added.

That would also be applicable to food. Heavy tax on unhealthy food, no more 3$ meals in McDonald's. If people were to pay 15$ for a meal, they wouldn't go there so much. Taxing fat people more is... complicated and can easily backfire.

I agree with Sarmatian about smokers, but not about fast food. If you did that, no one would eat fast food (they eat it because it is cheaper than other food, which it no longer would be), and killing the entire fast food industry all at once like that would devastate the economy. The whole point of Obama's proposed tax is to pay for the health care system, but when the economy takes a blow like that, less people are working, and have less money to pay taxes, it would be a lot harder to pay for anything. (and what right does the government have to take all those jobs away from people)
Anyway, who is to say what is unhealthy? Even scientists disagree all the time on what is and isn't. The truth is that there are many aspects to things, and a lot that we don't know.

And like I said Sarmatian, think of the fairness. If you are going to do that, will you also put a large tax on hockey equipment? How about sex toys? What about extreme sports equipment? You know what I mean? It is unfair to tax one thing that adds to the cost but not the other. At the same time though it would be impossible to fairly tax everything that adds to the cost.
That is why I think that the government should not be trying to run health care. Small companies have a hard time being fair and taking care of themselves. When the government takes health care over it will be just a massive company with near absolute power, and 100 times the capacity for corruption and mismanagment.

[rory_20_uk]

How 'bout things like AIDS?

Numbers with AIDS compared to obese persons is tiny. These days most who are HIV+ve are relatively healthy.
HIV is not just a disease spread by sexual contact. It is also spread by any blood to blood or fluid to fluid contacts.

Smokers already pay huge tax when they buy cigarettes. I don't see why another should be added.

That would also be applicable to food. Heavy tax on unhealthy food, no more 3$ meals in McDonald's. If people were to pay 15$ for a meal, they wouldn't go there so much. Taxing fat people more is... complicated and can easily backfire.

Cigarette smokers not only kill themselves, but those around them too. In the UK the tax could be said to be there to help the health service; in America since there is no National health I guess the governemt just pockets the money.

You've made the example with McD's rather simplistic. If they were informed that taxes go up with foods over a certain level of calories they'd most likely do something to reduce the calorific content; similarly if it was also percentage of fat they'd reduce this to avoid the $15 meal; since all other competitors have the same rules this would not unfairly penalise them - any more than selling the junk does in the first place.

[Vuk]

Numbers with AIDS compared to obese persons is tiny. These days most who are HIV+ve are relatively healthy.
HIV is not just a disease spread by sexual contact. It is also spread by any blood to blood or fluid to fluid contacts.



Cigarette smokers not only kill themselves, but those around them too. In the UK the tax could be said to be there to help the health service; in America since there is no National health I guess the governemt just pockets the money.

You've made the example with McD's rather simplistic. If they were informed that taxes go up with foods over a certain level of calories they'd most likely do something to reduce the calorific content; similarly if it was also percentage of fat they'd reduce this to avoid the $15 meal; since all other competitors have the same rules this would not unfairly penalise them - any more than selling the junk does in the first place.

lol, you know there are many scientists who say that second hand smoke is not the danger it is made out to be. It is just which opinion the government decides to base its policy on (whichever is more profitable for the government, whichever interest groups pay them the most).

I don't think that second hand smoke is dangerous. If a business owner thinks so, then he has the right to not allow smoking in his establishment, and if that is what majority of the people think, then business owners will do so because they will get majority of the business.

On an unscientific note though, I got my right lung torn when I was 16 (fell a great height without letting breath out. Try it some time, it is painful ), and had to have my lungs examined. The doctor was concerned because he asked me if anyone in my family smoked and I told him my dad smoked 4 packs a day. He was suprised though because my lungs were in excellent condition. I have lived in close quarters with smokers for the first 3/4+ of my life. It wasn't until I was 15 and half when my dad died that I was not around smokers daily.

Don't mean to turn this into a 2nd hand smoking discussion, but I am just saying, that is another problem with the government making policies like that. Which scientists do you believe? How about giving people the freedom to make their own choices?

[Fragony]

Smokers already pay huge tax when they buy cigarettes. I don't see why another should be added.

That would also be applicable to food. Heavy tax on unhealthy food, no more 3$ meals in McDonald's. If people were to pay 15$ for a meal, they wouldn't go there so much. Taxing fat people more is... complicated and can easily backfire.

not more tax, more costly insurance