Hopefully Japan doesn't ban coffee and cigarettes.

It seems this only applies to gainfully applied suits. Does this mean fatto unemployed otaku are exempt?

edit: Holy shit at the piece's author being 5'10" 180 with a 35.5" waist.
 
133 lbs is fat for a woman? Shit we don't even call women fat in the US unless they're past 250 and even then they just get labeled as BOOTYLICIOUS or LAFFY TAFFY.
 
I like the idea of rewarding fit people with lower premiums. It's just too hard to set an arbritrary number to meet without any regard for height.
 
Okay, what's the difference between saying "You're fat, you pay $50 bill + $25 fat charge." and saying "You're skinny, you pay $75 bill - $25 skinny discount."?
 
I'll admit, to the majority of people, they'll see the two different "plans" very differently, ignoring the fact they're the exact same thing.

As you, yourself said they were the same thing, I'm highly confused by your "grade school mentality" remark.
 
By saying that rewarding fit people is the same as punishing people, it gets into people's minds that they're both wrong.

I really should've said that punishing the fat is a grade school type stunt that gets us nowhere as a society. Rewarding the fit can make us all look at fitness in a good way instead of another shame for people to suffer through.
 
[quote name='Feeding the Abscess']35.4" waist for a woman, but only 33.5" for guys? That doesn't make sense. Must be the other way around.[/QUOTE]

Once a woman has a child, the waist is gone. C-sections just make it worse.
 
Good. Damn fatties.

Though I do agree there should be some measurement of height into the equation. Most Japanese are pretty short though so it probably isn't as much of an issue there than it would be here.
 
[quote name='depascal22']I like the idea of rewarding fit people with lower premiums. It's just too hard to set an arbritrary number to meet without any regard for height.[/QUOTE]

Use body fat% rather than BMI, measurements and other crap.

The fat penalty vs. reward healthy people is really just semantics on how you spin it. It really is pretty much the same thing.

It's just less offensive to frame it was earning rewards for being healthy, than saying you're going to penalize fat people. The former is more positive and is more likely to get more people to put some effort into taking care of themselves, while the latter is more likely to just piss off and alienate fat people--despite really being the same concept in practice with the difference just being the PR spin.
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']Y'all should read the first two comments on the article.[/QUOTE]

Anyone can surmise what the first two comments say straight from the article itself if one is not a complete retard.
 
[quote name='Paco']133 lbs is fat for a woman? Shit we don't even call women fat in the US unless they're past 250 and even then they just get labeled as BOOTYLICIOUS or LAFFY TAFFY.[/QUOTE]

People in Japan are a lot smaller than here. (In all seriousness) That's why 33.5" for a man is large there, where here, it's pretty normal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top