One mans quest for a "fat tax"

alonzomourning23

CAGiversary!
Feedback
26 (100%)
Meet Irwin Leba, a rich and reclusive Texan whose mission in life is to balance the budget by taxing the obese. Fat chance, right?

Considering everything I'd heard about him, it took surprisingly little effort to convince Irwin Leba to sit down with me at a McDonald's off I-27, not far from his home outside Plainview, Texas. It was a cheap journalist's ruse, really: I knew full well that the parade of Big Mac gluttons was bound to get him riled. He accepted my invitation, I later found out, against the advice of his PR people in Washington.
.

A pear-shaped Hispanic woman and her husky son lumber past our table, their trays stacked with McNugget boxes. I feel a boot kick me under the table. "Would you look at these fat asses?" he says. "Excuse me, 'body-image-challenged individuals'—that's what we're supposed to call them these days." Leba scowls and twists uncomfortably in his seat.

"You want to know why the Chinese are beating us, not to mention the Koreans, the Cambodians, and the Laotians? I've been to the Orient. I've seen it myself. They eat all sorts of seaweed crap that we wouldn't feed to anything that didn't have four legs and go moo. Meanwhile, we've got these porkers"—he jerks his chin at a family of four that's happily enjoying lunch at a nearby table—"shoving triple-bacon Whoppers down their throats. Who do you think is going to have higher productivity?" He pauses. "Them."

It is one of the delicious ironies of his life that Leba himself has a body image that is moderately challenged. In fact, he sports the sort of perfect paunch you could calculate pi off of. And with those Neil Young chops and the cowboy hat and the tight-fitting blue jeans, he looks more like a honky-tonk washout than one of the most open-walleted political donors in America.

Leba is a sixty-six-year-old recluse who seems to have materialized out of the dust of the Texas panhandle and would probably disappear just as quickly were it not for one fantastically audacious idea that he believes will be his patriotic legacy. That idea is called the fat tax.

If Leba has his way, sometime between January 1 and April 15, every American will have to visit a government-sponsored weigh station and step on a scale. You'll leave with a notarized certificate attesting to your body-mass index (BMI). If that number is 25.5 or higher—24.9 is officially the upper limit of normal—you'll have to pay Uncle Sam a little something extra, corresponding to how overweight you are and scaled to your income. (To calculate your own fat tax, see page 108.)

"Let's say you're five foot eight and you weigh 215 pounds—I'm just pulling these numbers out of the air," says Leba, though they actually seem to describe him pretty well. "You'd have a BMI of 32.7, which is disgustingly overweight. Now let's say you're in the highest tax bracket and you pulled in roughly $2 million last year. Under my plan, you'd be looking at a $70,000 fat tax"—and that's on top of your income tax. He takes a long sip of his Diet Coke. "That'll make you think twice before stuffing your face with goose-liver pâté, don't you think?"

Studies show that approximately 9 percent of all health-care costs in the United States are the result, either directly or indirectly, of obesity. "That's somewhere on the order of $80 billion being spent each year just because a few people think life is one big Vegas buffet," says Leba. "And about half that amount is paid by Medicare and Medicaid." Last year he founded a nonprofit think tank, the Institute for a Healthy America (IHA), with the sole objective of trying to make the fat tax a reality. He says he has already spent $5 million of his own money promoting the idea, much of it, presumably, to pay the political pros who script the catchy rhetoric that flows steadily from his mouth. "Fair taxation for a cellulite nation—that's what this is about."

To provoke him, and also because I'm hungry, I'm nibbling on a large order of fries while we talk. I'm in the middle of a question about his libertarian critics when he reaches across the table, grabs a handful of my fries, and shovels them into his mouth. I'm floored. It's like I just watched the drug czar take a bong hit. Before he has even swallowed, he slams his fist on the table and curses himself: "Irwin, you're a goddamn good-for-nothing hogfucker."

He pulls out a billfold thick with Franklins and counts out four of them, then reaches over and tucks them into my breast pocket.

"I need you to hold on to these until we get back to Sweet Acres," he says, standing up to leave.
Um, okay.
Sweet Acres is Leba's sprawling ranch, named after the 1,144 sweet acres of Texas desert it spreads across. From the interstate, it's just a dot way off in the distance, linked to civilization—if that's what you want to call the surrounding brush—by a long, juniper-lined gravel road. The house itself is a supersized McMansion with massive Corinthian columns framing the porch.

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"When I'm in New York or Boston or one of those places on the seaboard, people look down on me because they say I'm 'nouveau riche,' " he says, taking his hands off the wheel of his white Navigator to drop air quotes around that last phrase. "Out here, I'm just riche." In the center of his semicircular driveway, there is a twice-life-sized statue of nude Greco-Roman wrestlers grappling—a reminder of his days as a high school wrestler, he tells me—and a flagpole waving the largest American flag in the county. "Bigger is always better," he says, staring proudly up at the flag. "Except with people." ......[/FONT]

For the last several months, the IHA has been preparing draft legislation for a fat tax and circulating it around Washington for comments. Leba's pencil heads estimate that the fat tax could bring in as much as $150 billion a year in increased revenue for the federal government. It could also, they say, cut American obesity in half by 2013 and save 250,000 lives.


For all the crassness in how it's been promoted, the fat tax has won plaudits from health advocates. "The fat tax could be our antidote to the obesity epidemic," acknowledges a Centers for Disease Control researcher who requested anonymity. "On the other hand, we're a bit concerned that people will go on unhealthy crash diets just before they head to the scales."

Leba isn't alone in thinking government should use economic incentives to fight obesity. Both the British health ministry and the World Health Organization have endorsed the idea of a sin tax on junk food, as has the mayor of Detroit. But Leba doesn't consider them allies.

"The guys who want to tax fat food instead of fat people have got it all wrong. If you exercise and have a high metabolism, it's your right as an American to eat whatever the hell you want. If you're not in the ER having quadruple bypasses on Medicare's tab, if you're not making my day unpleasant by walking around in public in a muumuu, then the government shouldn't be punishing you with excessive taxes. That would be vaguely communistic."
Naturally, Leba has plenty of critics. I couldn't find a single obesity advocate who would even agree to an interview on the subject. (One of them called the very idea "fatist.") Legal scholars say it's probably an unconstitutional form of discrimination. And tax experts say it would be logistically impossible to implement.

But Leba won't be deterred by reality. Last year, in search of a public face for the fat tax, he made personal appeals to a handful of celebrities who have publicly battled with their weight. Kirstie Alley never even replied, nor did Oprah, Roseanne, or Al Roker. "Camryn Manheim told me to shove it," he says.
Then, on a trip to Denver last summer, Leba stepped into a hotel elevator with a man he could have sworn was Jared Fogle, the guy from the Subway commercials. It wasn't. "But it was his perfect doppelbanger," Leba says.
Doppelgänger?

"Whatever. I don't speak French."

Leba followed the look-alike out of the elevator and propositioned him in the hallway. "I knew I had to have him, so I asked him right then and there if he'd star in a TV commercial for $30,000. He asked me if he'd have to get naked. I told him, 'No, just lose ten pounds.' "
The ads will begin running in targeted congressional districts on April 1, just two weeks before tax day.

BACK IN PLAINVIEW, Leba gives me a tour of Sweet Acres. The house is nine thousand square feet of profound emptiness. He doesn't have any children, or even any close family. He has never married, and he says he hasn't been on a date since Nixon was president. There are no photos on the walls, nothing to suggest that Leba is anything more than a house sitter in his own mammoth home. Only the TV room seems to be lived in. There's a sixty-inch flat-screen on the wall, and a single lonely La-Z-Boy in the center of the room. Leba has to pull a folding chair out of the closet so I can have a place to sit.


"Would you believe that I used to be a total fat ass myself?" he asks, chuckling. "I've got this personal chef, a boy named Paul, who used to deep-fry Twinkies for me all the time. You ever had a deep-fried Twinkie? If you condensed all the goodness of Jesus Christ into one of those plastic wrappers, you'd have something that would be almost—but not quite—as divine as a deep-fried Twinkie." He catches himself. "Of course, Twinkies are a large part of what's wrong with America."

I tell Leba I've never had one before. Never even heard of such a thing.
"Hold on." He walks over to the intercom on the wall. "Paul, I've got a guest here who's never enjoyed the luxury of a deep-fried Twinkie. Can you fix that?" There's a pause before he presses the intercom again. "It's not for me."
You keep Twinkies on the premises?
"Just for guests."

Down in the kitchen, while Leba is in the bathroom, Paul explains to me that for the last seven years he's cooked only low-fat, low-carb, low-sodium meals for Leba. "We do lots of tofu, lots of greens," he says. "But I know Irwin munches on all sorts of stuff he's not supposed to when I'm not here. I confronted him about it once, but he got furious and threatened to fire me, so now I just keep my mouth shut."

On a pedestal near a vintage jukebox in Leba's kitchen, there's a huge glass jar filled three quarters to the brim with cash, IOUs, and personal checks. I pull out a check near the top that's made out to a Plain-view animal shelter. It's for $4,000.

"Ah, the fat jar," says Paul. "You're going to have to ask Irwin about that."
When he returns from the bathroom, I do.
"In 1993, stewardesses started making me wear a seat-belt extension. It was humiliating," Leba says. "I looked at myself in the mirror one morning, and I said, 'Irwin, you're revolting. This has got to change.' I took this big pretzel jar and I emptied it. I decided I'd donate a little money to charity every time I ate something that I wasn't supposed to. For each gram of what I call 'unwarranted fat' that I ate, I'd put a dollar in the jar. It wasn't long before I realized that wasn't enough money to make me think twice. I upped it to five dollars, then ten, then twenty. Now it's a hundred. You start noticing that kind of money after a while." Which explains the $400 he asked me to hold at McDonald's. As I reach into my shirt pocket and drop the bills in the jar, Leba walks across the kitchen and gazes wistfully at it.

"January 7, 1998. That's the day I figured out the fat tax. I was standing right where you're standing now. I'd just put a grand into the jar—it was a frozen Snickers, if I recall—and I was feeling pretty good about that, and I said to myself, 'Goddammit, Irwin, everyone ought to have a fat jar.' And then I said, 'What if government could be the fat jar?' And then I said, 'Goddammit, Irwin, that's the smartest thing you ever said to yourself.' "


Of course, for all its revenue-generating potential for local charities, Leba's fat jar has one fundamental shortcoming that he has somehow blinded himself to: While it may alleviate his guilt and temper his self-loathing, it doesn't seem to be making him any thinner. Wouldn't the same thing be true of the fat tax?
"That's hogshit," he retorts. "It's economics 101: The only thing people hate more than being fat is taxes."

Now that he's alone in the limo, out from under the thumb of Bartoff and his other PR handlers, Leba wants to have a little fun.
"One of the guys I had lunch with told me Nadler is going to be at the Palm for an early dinner," he tells me with a crack of his knuckles. "We're going to ambush him and give him the old Leba shakedown."

Since it's only 4:30, we end up idling in Leba's limo for an hour and a half in a no-parking zone in front of the restaurant on Nineteenth Street. When Congressman Nadler finally comes trundling down the block in a navy overcoat, Leba jumps out of the car and starts heckling him.

"C'mon, Jerry, how about a public debate? You and me on the fat tax. We'll keep it civil."

Nadler looks puzzled. Do I know this person? He doesn't answer, just keeps walking.

"How 'bout it, Jer, a lifetime supply of Swiss Cake Rolls for the winner."
But Nadler won't bite. He won't even acknowledge him. It's almost as though Irwin Leba is not even there.

Leba tries one more time. "Afraid of how it'll look if the fattest man in Congress won't back the fat tax?"

Nadler slips into the restaurant and slams the door behind him, but not before Leba promises to FedEx him a can of Slim-Fast every day until the fat tax becomes law.

Leba smacks his thigh and pumps his fist. "We've got Jerry on the run." He skips back to the limo and steps inside. "He'll come around. He has to. The country needs him to."
He sinks back into the plush leather, a satisfied smile on his face. "America's affluence is what got us so fat in the first place, and it's the only way we'll ever get healthy again," he says. "This tax is a great idea, the only truly great one I've ever had. And I'm going to fight like hell to make it real."


http://www.esquire.com/features/articles/2006/060302_mfe_iha_1.html

Visit http://www.fattaxfacts.org/ to learn more and get info on how you can support this. You can even calculate how much you'd owe if this was instituted. I'd owe nothing though, since I don't weigh enough.
 
"The guys who want to tax fat food instead of fat people have got it all wrong. If you exercise and have a high metabolism, it's your right as an American to eat whatever the hell you want. If you're not in the ER having quadruple bypasses on Medicare's tab, if you're not making my day unpleasant by walking around in public in a muumuu, then the government shouldn't be punishing you with excessive taxes. That would be vaguely communistic."

This is where he goes wrong because it's worse to have the government weighing people and taxing them for it, the government really has no business in policing people's personal lives. What should really happen is insurance companies should make the fat people pay the extra money that they will eventually cost the system. That's capitalism.
 
Brilliant! Lets not just stop at over taxing the fat but also lets add a dark skin tax (because working with dark skin people makes Texans always look over their shoulder making others less productive), a fugly tax (everyone knows working with beautiful people makes everyone more productive), religious tax (have to give religious holidays days and Sabbaths (holy days) off and not at work = less productive) and lets not forget my favorite the geek tax (they have bad social skills with nongeeks making them less productive.)

Lets make a mandatory 54 hour 6 day work week and if anyone doesn't meet the high productivity standard we will tax you some more and throw the less productive into a work camp to pay off their taxes.

God forbid the Asians are being more productive then us Americans, the Asians are beating us at............life?


BTW I understand this is an April fools joke ;)
 
Joke or not, its still a good idea. Its a better idea than the other fat tax I heard about whereby places like McDonalds would have to pay more in taxes for 'making people fat'.
 
Well I think a better solution than any kind of extra tax would be to just not give people the same medicaid benefits for a fat-related health problem if they're fat (and it's under their control). That solves the problem of taxing other people for some fatass's triple bypass and doesn't tax other fat people that may very well not have any health problems.

Of course any solution would probably complicate things to the point that paying for the new system costs more than paying for the fatass's triple bypass.
 
If we just taxed junk food (like they do in canda, or at least ontario) then we could make up much of the money we pay for in obesity related issues. We could also make a license required for running a grocery store. The license could require a minimum amount of healthy food, this would avoid some of the cases of large stores have very little healthier food and loading up on junk. I've heard horror stories from rural stores like piggly wiggly (or whatever it's called) and similar places. For examples, they have to have a certain amount of produce and/or other foods unlikely to result in weight and/or health problems. All the ones around here even have organic sections, but that doesn't seem to be true nationally.

Though we do have a very large amount of cases of anorexia, bulemia etc. in our society, so going overboard will simply further increase the health and medical issues on that end. A significant minority of people with those eating disorders eventually die from them. Eating disorders kill more people than all other mental health issues combined.
 
[quote name='Kayden']Joke or not, its still a good idea. [/QUOTE]

Ummm.....no. fuck whatever asshole thinks it's his job to tell someone else how they should look.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Ummm.....no. fuck whatever asshole thinks it's his job to tell someone else how they should look.[/quote]

...or tries to tell them whether or not they can get an abortion
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Ummm.....no. fuck whatever asshole thinks it's his job to tell someone else how they should look.[/quote]

Legislation about smoking is ok. Drinking. Pot. Driving. Abortion. Gay Mariage.

Why can't people that are fat be taxed/fined for the services the take more of?
 
[quote name='SpazX']Oh damn, that was a good one, alonzo wins the day.

(well I guess technically esquire wins, but yeah)[/QUOTE]


It would be a funny April fool's joke if it wasn't a pillar of alonzo's philosophy. Just replace "fat" with "excessive profit", "opulence", or "racial preference", or anything else the left thinks is unfairly distributed and the joke becomes reality.
 
[quote name='Kayden']Legislation about smoking is ok. Drinking. Pot. Driving. Abortion. Gay Mariage.

Why can't people that are fat be taxed/fined for the services the take more of?[/quote]

Since when do we tax smokers and drinkers more for health services?

The only comparison with smoking and drinking would be taxing junk food, but taxing individuals for health issues would be entirely different.

I'm not sure what abortion and same sex marriage have to do with this though.
 
Look at what I quoted in that post. He was saying it wasn't ok to tell people how fat they can be. The government tells people when they can drink, when they can smoke, when they can drive, that they can't smoke pot and that gays aren't allowed to marry. The governemnt makes laws about all kinds of stuff that dictates the way we act, look and think.

[quote name='alonzomourning23']Since when do we tax smokers and drinkers more for health services?

The only comparison with smoking and drinking would be taxing junk food, but taxing individuals for health issues would be entirely different.

I'm not sure what abortion and same sex marriage have to do with this though.[/quote]
 
[quote name='Kayden']Legislation about smoking is ok. Drinking. Pot. Driving. Abortion. Gay Mariage.

Why can't people that are fat be taxed/fined for the services the take more of?[/QUOTE]

Smoking affects people around you.
Drinking and driving affects other people.
Driving affects other people.
Pot smoking affects other people.
Abortion is about two people.
Nobody wants to stop gays from marrying; it's a question of whether the government should recognize such a marriage.

None of these things has to do with something that is just about someone by themselves. If someone is fat, that affects others as much as someone being tall, being thin, being short, having red hair, having long fingernails, whatever. It's none of anyone else's fucking business.
 
[quote name='Kayden']Look at what I quoted in that post. He was saying it wasn't ok to tell people how fat they can be. The government tells people when they can drink, when they can smoke, when they can drive, that they can't smoke pot and that gays aren't allowed to marry. The governemnt makes laws about all kinds of stuff that dictates the way we act, look and think.[/quote]

The government doesn't make individual laws. There is no precedent for a law dictating the amount of food you can eat, or the amount of food you can eat depending on your health and weight.
 
Although part of me thinks that this idea isnt' half bad, there are a lot of problems that this can create or add to.

I'm not too fond of people who stuff themselves and are too lazy to exercise then complain when they end up getting heart attacks but if I hear one more person complaining about their weight (sad thing is that many of these people aren't overweight) and talking about diet pills and diets and "omg, [they] just gained .5 lbs!!!", I'm going to go insane.
 
[quote name='vietgurl']Although part of me thinks that this idea isnt' half bad, there are a lot of problems that this can create or add to.

I'm not too fond of people who stuff themselves and are too lazy to exercise then complain when they end up getting heart attacks but if I hear one more person complaining about their weight (sad thing is that many of these people aren't overweight) and talking about diet pills and diets and "omg, [they] just gained .5 lbs!!!", I'm going to go insane.[/QUOTE]

We already have an epidemic of eating disorders in this country. How much worse will some insane idea like this make it?

http://www.edap.org/p.asp?WebPage_ID=286&Profile_ID=41138
In the United States, as many as 10 million females and 1 million males are fighting a life and death battle with an eating disorder such as anorexia or bulimia.

40% of newly identified cases of anorexia are in girls 15-19 years old.
Significant increase in incidence of anorexia from 1935 to 1989 especially among young women 15-24.
A rise in incidence of anorexia in young women 15-19 in each decade since 1930.
The incidence of bulimia in 10-39 year old women TRIPLED between 1988 and 1993.
Only one-third of people with anorexia in the community receive mental health care.
Only 6% of people with bulimia receive mental health care.
The majority of people with severe eating disorders do not receive adequate care.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']The government doesn't make individual laws. There is no precedent for a law dictating the amount of food you can eat, or the amount of food you can eat depending on your health and weight.[/quote]

We haves laws dictating how much you can drink.
 
[quote name='Quid']We haves laws dictating how much you can drink.[/QUOTE]

Since when? Yes, you can't drink a certain amount and drive, but it's not illegal to drink 20 beers at home if you want to (although inadvisable).
 
[quote name='camoor']

This is where he goes wrong because it's worse to have the government weighing people and taxing them for it, the government really has no business in policing people's personal lives. What should really happen is insurance companies should make the fat people pay the extra money that they will eventually cost the system. That's capitalism.[/QUOTE]

I'm with camoor here and thinks he's got it spot on. This has been one of the big reasons I'm opposed for now to a nationwide Healthcare plan because the cost you and me would pay to cover the obese, not NORMAL people, getting operations, would be OUTRAGEOUS. If we got this out of the way I think it could start to become a LOT more feasible.
Also I agree on Alonzo with taxing junk food but I don't think the government should get one dime of it to spend for the most part. Instead it should go to subsidizing Organic health food.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Since when? Yes, you can't drink a certain amount and drive, but it's not illegal to drink 20 beers at home if you want to (although inadvisable).[/quote]

Offtopic, but apparently if they REALLLY want to bust you for it, you cant drink 20 beers in a bar even if driving hasnt entered the equation yet.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Since when? Yes, you can't drink a certain amount and drive, but it's not illegal to drink 20 beers at home if you want to (although inadvisable).[/quote]
In your home no. Anywhere in public though then yes. Regardless of how you're acting, if you're over the legal limit, then you're considered drunk in public.
 
[quote name='Quid']In your home no. Anywhere in public though then yes. Regardless of how you're acting, if you're over the legal limit, then you're considered drunk in public.[/quote]

UnAmerican. Sounds like we need to have another Whiskey Rebellion.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']Offtopic, but apparently if they REALLLY want to bust you for it, you cant drink 20 beers in a bar even if driving hasnt entered the equation yet.[/quote]

That's texas. Though some other states or towns may have limits, but high enough to get drunk.

There's no one stopping me from downing 5 six packs other than my own inability to do it.

In your home no. Anywhere in public though then yes. Regardless of how you're acting, if you're over the legal limit, then you're considered drunk in public.

You can't drink in public period in many areas. Then again, you there's a lot of legal things you can do as much as you want, just not in public.
 
Another problem is health food seems to be more expensive than junk food, I can go out right now and buy a can of cheese pringles (which is like 30-40 grams of fat alltogehter I believe) for $1.50. Yet the price I'd pay to make a salad for lunch would be roughly $4.50 for about 2 salads.

They don't need to raise the price of fatty foods, just make healthy foods more available. For a poor family they can go to McDonalds and buy 10 burgers for $10 + tax for their family (2 each). Meanwhile if they bought their family 5 apples, a bag of carrots, some lean ground turkey) and some potatoes for dinner they'd spend about 17 dollars, it would last like 2 nights but it's still a bit much.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']You can't drink in public period in many areas. Then again, you there's a lot of legal things you can do as much as you want, just not in public.[/quote]
I'm sorry, did I say drinking in public? I thought what I said was drunk in public. Oh wait... that is what I said. Which is illegal in pretty much every state. All it requires is for you to have an alcohol content and a cop to decide that you're not capable of making rational decisions. Which would very much make it a law dictating how much a person can drink.

And looking at the post that sparked this, why would precedence matter?
 
Unless the law covers everything, then the specifics are not important. Unless you want to argue you can't drink to excess in your home that is.

And I'm not sure if you are talking about the original post, or another post that sparked your specific comment. If it's the original one then I guess you never figured out it was an april fools joke.
 
[quote name='arcadia']Another problem is health food seems to be more expensive than junk food, I can go out right now and buy a can of cheese pringles (which is like 30-40 grams of fat alltogehter I believe) for $1.50. Yet the price I'd pay to make a salad for lunch would be roughly $4.50 for about 2 salads.

They don't need to raise the price of fatty foods, just make healthy foods more available. For a poor family they can go to McDonalds and buy 10 burgers for $10 + tax for their family (2 each). Meanwhile if they bought their family 5 apples, a bag of carrots, some lean ground turkey) and some potatoes for dinner they'd spend about 17 dollars, it would last like 2 nights but it's still a bit much.[/QUOTE]

Where do you buy your Greens from because Costco isn't terrible for price of Organic lettuce and quantity. Going even farther to argue on a diet end I've argued I think people could have a REASONABLE Organic Vegan diet and still manage to save money over buying meat, think Oatmeal, Chikpeas and Beans for a few examples though I guess some of the fruits and vegetables would creep the price up.
Also I will agree for the luxury health food items they're expensive and need to be subsidized by a junk food tax, JMO.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']Also I will agree for the luxury health food items they're expensive and need to be subsidized by a junk food tax, JMO.[/quote]

See - I don't want this because it's really the government deciding what's good for the people.

Junk food tax should be enacted because junk food costs the government extra money through the hospital/emergency room, where obese people go for heart attacks, fainting spells, diabetic comas, etc

Frito Lay needs to pay it's fair share for bringing the consumers that it's killing back to life.
 
[quote name='camoor']Frito Lay needs to pay it's fair share for bringing the consumers that it's killing back to life.[/quote]

...

Especially since they're the ones making people eat their chips. DAMN YOU FRITO LAY!

Junk food is in no way physically addictive. So if you were going to have a tax meant to curb people from being fat it should be on those who can't stop gorging themselves. Though that'd be a bad idea too.
 
[quote name='Quid']...

Especially since they're the ones making people eat their chips. DAMN YOU FRITO LAY!

Junk food is in no way physically addictive. So if you were going to have a tax meant to curb people from being fat it should be on those who can't stop gorging themselves. Though that'd be a bad idea too.[/quote]

Physically and psychologically addictive are two forms of addiction, and boths can be difficult to deal with.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Physically and psychologically addictive are two forms of addiction, and boths can be difficult to deal with.[/quote]
Yes, but one is the fault of the substancce and one is the fault of the person who can't control themselves. Krispey Kreme is not at fault because there are people who don't care enough about their bodies to eat in moderation. McDonalds isn't pumping their fries full of nicotine, nor is Mars lacing their candy with heroin. People who are overweight because they eat too much of a bad thing are the ones at fault, not companies that sell junk food.
 
Psychological addiction can be controlled, but it is not as simple as what you suggest. Psychological addiction can be very powerful. If you have someone who self soothes by eating when they become upset or depressed, then you're at risk of having a vicious cycle develop.
 
[quote name='camoor']

This is where he goes wrong because it's worse to have the government weighing people and taxing them for it, the government really has no business in policing people's personal lives. What should really happen is insurance companies should make the fat people pay the extra money that they will eventually cost the system. That's capitalism.[/QUOTE]

Umm the insurance companies do do this? Unless you are talking strictly group health insurance and thats on its way to change.
In Michigan:
Individual health insurance can be flat out denied for any reason and is often done so due to height weight charts.

Life you pay for non preferred or lower "sub" classes or are not insurable all together.

Blue Cross is even in the begining stages of going to an 'Underwritten" plan due to adverse selection they are facing with the healthy jumping ship due ot high prices and the unhealthy flocking to the BCBS plans.

The only safe haven for now is the group health plans as its based on current health conditions 9not wieght), age, and sic code/location of the group. And its guaranteed coverage. Although the company can rate up to 200% or so.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']Psychological addiction can be controlled, but it is not as simple as what you suggest. Psychological addiction can be very powerful. If you have someone who self soothes by eating when they become upset or depressed, then you're at risk of having a vicious cycle develop.[/quote]
And some people with no lives replace them with the virtual world, playing MMOs until they literally drop dead. This doesn't put the company at fault which is the fucking point.
 
[quote name='camoor']UnAmerican. Sounds like we need to have another Whiskey Rebellion.[/QUOTE]

HUZZAH!!!! I'LL LEAD THE NEXT WATERMELON ARMY!!!!
 
[quote name='camoor']See - I don't want this because it's really the government deciding what's good for the people.

Junk food tax should be enacted because junk food costs the government extra money through the hospital/emergency room, where obese people go for heart attacks, fainting spells, diabetic comas, etc

Frito Lay needs to pay it's fair share for bringing the consumers that it's killing back to life.[/QUOTE]

Yes but knowing the government they'll overtax it and put it on some junk programs. Like wtf should I be paying for the construction of new roads with a tax like this and therein I see where this may go. My point is besides medical costs this should extend further to have SOME subsidization of healthy products.
Also camoor I think any Pharma company paying Frito Lay and others to put junk preservatives in to make these chips and so on cheaper should have to pay their fair share as well. Yes I believe some Pharma companies subsidize these junk foods.
 
[quote name='Quid']And some people with no lives replace them with the virtual world, playing MMOs until they literally drop dead. This doesn't put the company at fault which is the fucking point.[/quote]

Oh why, you cursed. You really showed me.

Psychological addiction and physical addiction can both result in very strong compulsions, and both are initiated by the individual to begin with.
 
[quote name='Quid']Yes, but one is the fault of the substancce and one is the fault of the person who can't control themselves. Krispey Kreme is not at fault because there are people who don't care enough about their bodies to eat in moderation. McDonalds isn't pumping their fries full of nicotine, nor is Mars lacing their candy with heroin. People who are overweight because they eat too much of a bad thing are the ones at fault, not companies that sell junk food.[/quote]

If a fat dude with no health insurance and no cash gets a heart attack, what do you propose we do, just let him die in the streets? No we take him to a hospital where he is cured and then vanishes, thus leaving my tax dollars to pay for the doctor/nurse/emergency room/medical hardware costs.

Even if the fat dude has some sort of medicare, my tax dollars are still being funneled into keeping him alive so he can buy another pack of frito lay pork rinds or double-meat bigmacs, meanwhile the hamburglar is laughing all the way to the bank. It's either time to make fatty food companies pay their share, either that or we just let fat people with no health insurance die in the streets, which I predict would be a disaster (although it might dispel the myth of western medical omninescience and give rise to more exercise-oriented and natural herbal remedies, which would be a beneficial side effect)
 
[quote name='Quid']...

Especially since they're the ones making people eat their chips. DAMN YOU FRITO LAY!

Junk food is in no way physically addictive. So if you were going to have a tax meant to curb people from being fat it should be on those who can't stop gorging themselves. Though that'd be a bad idea too.[/quote]

I never said fat foods are addictive (although I wouldn't be surprised if McDonalds has secret studies on the addictiveness of chems they put in their hamburgers similar to how cig companies tooled around with nicotine levels in cigs). They just inadvertently cost me more tax dollars in the form of medical treatment, money which I'm not willing to pay to pad the bottom line of Frito Lay.
 
[quote name='Sarang01']Yes but knowing the government they'll overtax it and put it on some junk programs. Like wtf should I be paying for the construction of new roads with a tax like this and therein I see where this may go. My point is besides medical costs this should extend further to have SOME subsidization of healthy products.
Also camoor I think any Pharma company paying Frito Lay and others to put junk preservatives in to make these chips and so on cheaper should have to pay their fair share as well. Yes I believe some Pharma companies subsidize these junk foods.[/quote]

Well I agree with your first point, junk food taxes should go directly to hospitals and medicare programs for the obese - nowhere else.

If preservatives can be proven to cause cancer or something equally harmful, then don't just tax them extra - ban them!
 
[quote name='munch']HUZZAH!!!! I'LL LEAD THE NEXT WATERMELON ARMY!!!![/quote]

When we win, you will make a perfect addition to my cabinet. I'm going to make you the Secretary of Partying Down!
 
BMI isn't really the perfect system for determining who's overweight anyway. (Apologies if this has already been discussed.) Very muscular people can have a high BMI, but they certainly aren't fat. Maybe an exemption if you can bench 100%+ of your bodyweight. :mrgreen: (You don't have to be superman to bench your weight, but nobody overweight and out of shape would really be able to do it, right?) Of course, then we'd have to check for doping by fat people to bulk up and hit the exemption. Oh man this shit is snowballing out of control.

And this would totally screw guys with no legs. They'd only be like 44" tall or so. BMI through the roof!
 
[quote name='wubb']BMI isn't really the perfect system for determining who's overweight anyway. (Apologies if this has already been discussed.) Very muscular people can have a high BMI, but they certainly aren't fat. Maybe an exemption if you can bench 100%+ of your bodyweight. :mrgreen: (You don't have to be superman to bench your weight, but nobody overweight and out of shape would really be able to do it, right?) Of course, then we'd have to check for doping by fat people to bulk up and hit the exemption. Oh man this shit is snowballing out of control.

And this would totally screw guys with no legs. They'd only be like 44" tall or so. BMI through the roof![/QUOTE]

BMI is some stupid shit. Check this out:

http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm/headline/1495
The resulting standards put Hollywood hunks like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone in the “obese” column, with Mel Gibson and Michael Jordan meeting the definition of “overweight.”
 
My only problem with the whole fat tax idea is what do you do about people who have medical problems that may not be diagnosed like thyroid disorders. Also what about people who are recovering from illnesses or broken legs.
 
[quote name='camoor']If a fat dude with no health insurance and no cash gets a heart attack, what do you propose we do, just let him die in the streets? No we take him to a hospital where he is cured and then vanishes, thus leaving my tax dollars to pay for the doctor/nurse/emergency room/medical hardware costs.

Even if the fat dude has some sort of medicare, my tax dollars are still being funneled into keeping him alive so he can buy another pack of frito lay pork rinds or double-meat bigmacs, meanwhile the hamburglar is laughing all the way to the bank. It's either time to make fatty food companies pay their share, either that or we just let fat people with no health insurance die in the streets, which I predict would be a disaster (although it might dispel the myth of western medical omninescience and give rise to more exercise-oriented and natural herbal remedies, which would be a beneficial side effect)[/quote]

Yeah but if a skinny dude has a heart attack from smoking and bails out, your tax dollars will go toward paying for the doctor/nurse/emergency room/medical hardware costs.
 
[quote name='arcadia']Yeah but if a skinny dude has a heart attack from smoking and bails out, your tax dollars will go toward paying for the doctor/nurse/emergency room/medical hardware costs.[/quote]

...and cigs are taxed through the roof, thus offsetting this cost.

I don't see why we should be hypocritical when it comes to fatty foods, these foods kill. While it isn't my duty to change the behavior of the fatty who can't discipline him/herself enough to keep their hand out of the bucket, I'll be damned if I should be the one who pays when they have a heart attack and use a hospital emergency room. Let the company who peddled this deepfried death-in-a-bucket pay the tab. It's not the taxpayers job to pay for cleanup after KFC makes a profit.
 
bread's done
Back
Top