FAT TAX IS SUPPORTED BY 86% OF T.I.

[idigtigs]

Can you look at a born endomorph the same way you look at an ectomorph? I'm closer to the ecto, and can eat anything I want, anytime I want and not gain a thing. So it would be easy for me to support OP's viewpoint.

But I was in grade school with an endo who was big from the get go. He later committed suicide. Who knows if it was bc of his condition.

I'm usually a hard line conservative on issues, but I've seen a few people in life that could never be thin, no matter how hard they dieted or worked out.

 

[Transference]

Fat people are the biggest problem facing America, so whatever laws are necessary, I am in.

If we spent a fraction of the amount of money on fat people that we have fighting ISIS, we would have eradicated the fat people problem already.

 

[TAINT_PAINT]

Fat people are the biggest problem facing America, so whatever laws are necessary, I am in.

If we spent a fraction of the amount of money on fat people that we have fighting ISIS, we would have eradicated the fat people problem already.

REVOLUTION!!!!!

 

[amynhop]

Fat people are the biggest problem facing America, so whatever laws are necessary, I am in.

If we spent a fraction of the amount of money on fat people that we have fighting ISIS, we would have eradicated the fat people problem already.

Should we just drive them all out in the middle of nowhere and leave them for dead?

 

[VeniceTiger]

Well you should know that many people do.

Which is why we need the government to step in. If you are that stupid to think that is a healthy option, then you aren’t responsible enough to choose what food you eat.

 

[amynhop]

Which is why we need the government to step in. If you are that stupid to think that is a healthy option, then you aren’t responsible enough to choose what food you eat.

Nope. That's where we disagree. Don't need the government to "step in" to regulate what we damn eat.
Where the freak does that end with the government "stepping in"?

Uh... no thanks.

 

[TigerDutch]

Fat people are the biggest problem facing America, so whatever laws are necessary, I am in.

If we spent a fraction of the amount of money on fat people that we have fighting ISIS, we would have eradicated the fat people problem already.

Like we've eradicated the drug problem? Yep, throw more $$$ and laws at it.....it shall go away.

More laws & government equals more waste and little to no solution.

Time after time we're reminded of this and people still think it's a solution.

 

[scotchtiger]

Nope. That's where we disagree. Don't need the government to "step in" to regulate what we damn eat.
Where the freak does that end with the government "stepping in"?

Uh... no thanks.

Yea I agree. Just make people pay for the consequences of their unhealthy choices. Significantly higher insurance premiums, medicare surcharges, etc. The financial impact will work its way around to the initiating behavior.

And where the government is already involved (medicaid and food stamps), just implement common sense measures to correct behavior. Can't spend food stamps on unhealthy food, mandatory corrective action for obesity/smoking/etc if you want medicaid coverage, etc.

 

[TAINT_PAINT]

Like we've eradicated the drug problem? Yep, throw more $$$ and laws at it.....it shall go away.

More laws & government equals more waste and little to no solution.

Time after time we're reminded of this and people still think it's a solution.

AGAIN MOST PEOPLE ARE OK WITH GOVT OVERSIGHT IF ITS WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN PROGRAMMED TO LIKE. I AM GUESSING YOU DONT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH SESSIONS GOING AFTER HARMLESS WEED OR OUR GOVT STARTING NEEDLESS WARS.

 

[VeniceTiger]

Nope. That's where we disagree. Don't need the government to "step in" to regulate what we damn eat.
Where the freak does that end with the government "stepping in"?

Uh... no thanks.

Ok. So the government shouldn’t regulate what food companies can sell us, and consider “food”? The government already does this. They are just redefining what is considered food. Not every American is intelligent enough to understand what processed foods do to your body.

 

[VeniceTiger]

Yea I agree. Just make people pay for the consequences of their unhealthy choices. Significantly higher insurance premiums, medicare surcharges, etc. The financial impact will work its way around to the initiating behavior.

And where the government is already involved (medicaid and food stamps), just implement common sense measures to correct behavior. Can't spend food stamps on unhealthy food, mandatory corrective action for obesity/smoking/etc if you want medicaid coverage, etc.

In theory that should work, but there aren’t many examples in history where that has changed behaviors.

I really don’t know why anyone would be fighting to preserve their right to eat shitty foods.

@TAINT_PAINT excellent thread today.

 

[amynhop]

Ok. So the government shouldn’t regulate what food companies can sell us, and consider “food”? The government already does this. They are just redefining what is considered food. Not every American is intelligent enough to understand what processed foods do to your body.

Not what you said. You said if a person was too stupid to know what was or wasn't healthy, the government should step in because said person wasn't responsible enough to choose their own food. And that is pure bullshit.

 

[TigerDutch]

AGAIN MOST PEOPLE ARE OK WITH GOVT OVERSIGHT IF ITS WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN PROGRAMMED TO LIKE. I AM GUESSING YOU DONT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH SESSIONS GOING AFTER HARMLESS WEED OR OUR GOVT STARTING NEEDLESS WARS.

Shot fired & missed...badly. Because I'm not a fan of needless wars (should have never gone into Iraq in 2003) and weed is not really the problem but countless other drugs.

Never a fan of the "just throw laws and $$$ at it and it will go away." Sorry some of y'all do. It never works.

 

[snoodacris]

Type2 is increasingly being understood as a genetic disease exacerbated by environmental factors, fwiw.

genetics load the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger ... this is true for basically every health related disease

 

[TAINT_PAINT]

Shot fired & missed...badly. Because I'm not a fan of needless wars (should have never gone into Iraq in 2003) and weed is not really the problem but countless other drugs.

Never a fan of the "just throw laws and $$$ at it and it will go away." Sorry some of y'all do. It never works.

OK FAIR ENOUGH. SO YOU DONT WANT FATS TO CHANGE? YOU COOL WITH THE FAT CYCLE STARTING AT 8 YEARS OLD? AND REMEMBER WE PAY FOR IT.

WITHOUT REGS HOW DO WE DO THIS?

BC LEFT TO OUR OWN DEVICES WE SEE SILLY SHIT LIKE BIG FOOD LOBBYISTS GETTING PIZZA SAUCE TO COUNT AS A VEGETABLE FOR SCHOOL LUNCH.

 

[The Orange Wave]

Nope. That's where we disagree. Don't need the government to "step in" to regulate what we damn eat.
Where the freak does that end with the government "stepping in"?

Uh... no thanks.

The reason @scotchtiger and others think that the government needs to "step in" is because the government already is in. More than 40%of the population through VA, medicare, and medicaid is on a government run healthcare program, so we are all footing the bill for this. It's the same as allowing a car insurance company to not charge someone who has 3 DUI's and 5 speeding tickets a higher premium than someone with a pristine driving record.

 

[TigerFlow]

You can’t out-exercise a diet of chicken nuggets, pizza, ice cream, and coke. Changing from French fries to a salad will do more than running 3 miles a day.

I agree with your point. However, people underestimate how big an impact the environment you live in(cities/towns/communities) makes on every aspect of your life - including food availability, options, and choices. Living in better designed environments would result in a healthier population, and not solely due to more people choosing to bike/walk for transportation purposes.

Not too many people are married to someone with a Masters degree(from Clemson) in City Planning who works on this stuff every day. It's remarkable how much my perspective on built environments has changed due to what I've learned from my wife and how my perspectives and observations of the place I live and those places I travel to have changed. It's fascinating stuff - most people pay no attention to it at all and it affects us all every minute of every day.

 

[snoodacris]

No new laws needed. Only 2 things.

1. Stop subsidizing corn

2. Only allow food stamps to be used for low carb organic food.

BOOM

#1 should change to "stop subsidizing all foods ... including corn, soy, beef, chicken, pork, all dairy products, etc."

#2 should change to "only allow food stamps to be used for whole plant foods"

"low carb" is such a falsehood because people mistakenly group good carbs with bad carbs. our bodies are made to run on good carbohydrates (see: whole plant foods in their natural, unprocessed state)

 

[TAINT_PAINT]

Not what you said. You said if a person was too stupid to know what was or wasn't healthy, the government should step in because said person wasn't responsible enough to choose their own food. And that is pure bullshit.

ARE YOU COOL WITH CUTTING CORN AND SUGAR SUBSIDIES? TAKE YOUR TIME, I KNOW YOU NEED TIME TO LOOK UP THAT CHAPTER IN YOUR SHEEP MANUAL.

 

[snoodacris]

Just keep eating beef. Lots and lots of beef. Please and thank you.

horrible advice ... beef and the entire animal agriculture industry are the sources of many huge problems around the globe

if people want to improve their health, the answer is more whole plant foods and less animal products

 

[amynhop]

ARE YOU COOL WITH CUTTING CORN AND SUGAR SUBSIDIES? TAKE YOUR TIME, I KNOW YOU NEED TIME TO LOOK UP THAT CHAPTER IN YOUR SHEEP MANUAL.

You can never disagree without hurling insults, can you?

 

[TigerDutch]

OK FAIR ENOUGH. SO YOU DONT WANT FATS TO CHANGE? YOU COOL WITH THE FAT CYCLE STARTING AT 8 YEARS OLD? AND REMEMBER WE PAY FOR IT.

WITHOUT REGS HOW DO WE DO THIS?

BC LEFT TO OUR OWN DEVICES WE SEE SILLY SHIT LIKE BIG FOOD LOBBYISTS GETTING PIZZA SAUCE TO COUNT AS A VEGETABLE FOR SCHOOL LUNCH.

Meh. And you could make the argument most fats die before 65, so they won't tax Medicare. Heck, most of the really really old tax Medicare because they live too long, so let's just kill them off. Oh, you can't afford a nursing home and you're over 85? Well, kill yourself.

I do think paying higher premiums and general incentives is good, but I don't think the government will solve it. They will just screw it up. But, it will make fat people sexy because they will likely be filthy rich. Oh, look at him Sally, he can afford Bologna and McDonald's.....what a catch!!

 

[snoodacris]

Nope. That's where we disagree. Don't need the government to "step in" to regulate what we damn eat.
Where the freak does that end with the government "stepping in"?

Uh... no thanks.

The government already heavily regulates what we eat through subsidies, school lunch programs, the USDA, etc.

 

[amynhop]

The government already heavily regulates what we eat through subsidies, school lunch programs, the USDA, etc.

That wasn't the context. You are taking that dialogue out of context.

 

[snoodacris]

That wasn't the context. You are taking that dialogue out of context.

your quote was, "Don't need the government to "step in" to regulate what we damn eat."

my response is that the government is already doing this, and does it heavily

 

[tallulahtiger30319]

you all arent taking @TAINT_PAINT seriously, but he is spot on.

We are paying for the fats already. They are driving your insurance rates up. Diseases related to obesity are taking up hospital space.

I dont think i'd be ok with that particular idea, but restaurants should have to put nutritional information on their menus (and not in some dumb pamphlet that you have to ask for, it should be ON THE MENU). That McDonalds breakfast you want to eat? Yea, its your entire recommended daily intake of salt, calories, fat, and sugar. That should be made clear so that we can all make intelligent decisions.

Nope. That's where we disagree. Don't need the government to "step in" to regulate what we damn eat.
Where the freak does that end with the government "stepping in"?

Uh... no thanks.

Try as I might, I will NEVER understand anyone who would willingly surrender individual liberty to the government. Makes no sense to me. But that's just me. And apparently you, too ;-)

 

[amynhop]

Try as I might, I will NEVER understand anyone who would willingly surrender individual liberty to the government. Makes no sense to me. But that's just me. And apparently you, too ;-)

ABSOLUTELY! ( when in Rome with the caps lock )

 

[TAINT_PAINT]

Try as I might, I will NEVER understand anyone who would willingly surrender individual liberty to the government. Makes no sense to me. But that's just me. And apparently you, too ;-)

JESUS THESE PROGRAMMED RESPONSES ARE TIRESOME. JUST THINK FOR YOURSELF. THE ONLY WAY TO CURB THIS PROBLEM IS VIA THE FEDERAL GOVT. I DONT LIKE IT BUT THATS THE ONLY WAY. AND WHY DO I WANT THIS? BECAUSE WE PAY FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF BAD DIETS AND LIFESTYLES. WE HAVE LOBBYISTS THAT KEEP JUNK FOOD IN SCHOOLS. WE HAVE LOBBYISTS THAT ENSURE CORN AND SUGAR ARE SUBSIDIZED. THESE TWO THINGS ARE PAID FOR BY US TAXPAYERS AS WELL.

SO DONT GIVE A PACKAGED RESPONSE ABOUT SURRENDERING TO THE GOVT. ITS OUR MONEY. AND I WOULD RATHER MY MONEY GOING TO PAY FOR JOB TRAINING AND INFRASTRUCTURE VERSES DIABETES TREATMENT AND JUNK FOOD SUBSIDIES.

 

[VeniceTiger]

I agree with your point. However, people underestimate how big an impact the environment you live in(cities/towns/communities) makes on every aspect of your life - including food availability, options, and choices. Living in better designed environments would result in a healthier population, and not solely due to more people choosing to bike/walk for transportation purposes.

Not too many people are married to someone with a Masters degree(from Clemson) in City Planning who works on this stuff every day. It's remarkable how much my perspective on built environments has changed due to what I've learned from my wife and how my perspectives and observations of the place I live and those places I travel to have changed. It's fascinating stuff - most people pay no attention to it at all and it affects us all every minute of every day.

Sorry, I didn’t mean to diminish your point. Absolutely true and a reason why those in nYC tend to be healthier. I content that a bigger reason is that the food sold in America is the lowest quality in the world. People in this thread don’t want government oversight but they don’t understand that food companies can manipulate the average American consumer. 90% of what is in your average grocery store should not be eaten. And the stuff in fast food is much worse.

 

[VeniceTiger]

JESUS THESE PROGRAMMED RESPONSES ARE TIRESOME. JUST THINK FOR YOURSELF. THE ONLY WAY TO CURB THIS PROBLEM IS VIA THE FEDERAL GOVT. I DONT LIKE IT BUT THATS THE ONLY WAY. AND WHY DO I WANT THIS? BECAUSE WE PAY FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF BAD DIETS AND LIFESTYLES. WE HAVE LOBBYISTS THAT KEEP JUNK FOOD IN SCHOOLS. WE HAVE LOBBYISTS THAT ENSURE CORN AND SUGAR ARE SUBSIDIZED. THESE TWO THINGS ARE PAID FOR BY US TAXPAYERS AS WELL.

SO DONT GIVE A PACKAGED RESPONSE ABOUT SURRENDERING TO THE GOVT. ITS OUR MONEY. AND I WOULD RATHER MY MONEY GOING TO PAY FOR JOB TRAINING AND INFRASTRUCTURE VERSES DIABETES TREATMENT AND JUNK FOOD SUBSIDIES.

These responses just show how few in our country are able to think for themselves. If you can’t understand this, then how the hell are you going to know why sodium nitrate and high fructose corn syrup don’t make your lean cuisine microwaveable meal an ideal choice.

 

[tallulahtiger30319]

JESUS THESE PROGRAMMED RESPONSES ARE TIRESOME. JUST THINK FOR YOURSELF. THE ONLY WAY TO CURB THIS PROBLEM IS VIA THE FEDERAL GOVT. I DONT LIKE IT BUT THATS THE ONLY WAY. AND WHY DO I WANT THIS? BECAUSE WE PAY FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF BAD DIETS AND LIFESTYLES. WE HAVE LOBBYISTS THAT KEEP JUNK FOOD IN SCHOOLS. WE HAVE LOBBYISTS THAT ENSURE CORN AND SUGAR ARE SUBSIDIZED. THESE TWO THINGS ARE PAID FOR BY US TAXPAYERS AS WELL.

SO DONT GIVE A PACKAGED RESPONSE ABOUT SURRENDERING TO THE GOVT. ITS OUR MONEY. AND I WOULD RATHER MY MONEY GOING TO PAY FOR JOB TRAINING AND INFRASTRUCTURE VERSES DIABETES TREATMENT AND JUNK FOOD SUBSIDIES.

WASN"T A PACKAGED RESPONSE> when I say it, I mean it. I don't want the govt telling me what to do. I really don't. And I'm sure the UK isn't doing this to get rid of all the fats over there, or others who are a drain on their health system. I'm not sure why they're doing it, but w the number of cigarette smokers over there, I suppose I'd believe they're concerned about public health if they put a cap on the amount of cigarettes each citizen is allowed to smoke. Now, don't misunderstand. I'm not suggesting the govt should do that. I personally HATE smoking, but just like eating crappy food, it seems like a personal decision to me.

 

[NorthStateTiger]

I've proposed some of these before:

• Allow health insurers to rate people based on controllable health factors (ie obesity, smoking, etc.). Uncontrollable pre-existing conditions still excluded, but if a smoker is likely to be 3X more expensive and an obese person is likely to be 4X more expensive than a fit non-smoker, then that's the rate they should pay.
  
• Charge people a Medicare surcharge tax if their controllable health factors predict a future burden on the Medicare program. They can earn this back if they reverse their trend. They are ineligible for Medicare if they don't participate in annual preventative health appointments. Over 65 pays surcharge as well if obese/smoke/etc.
  
• Mandatory health improvement initiatives if you are obese/smoking/etc. and on Medicaid.
  
• EDIT: Add limiting food stamps to healthy food. No fast food. No junk food. No candy.
  
• Plenty of other opportunities to have those placing a burden on the system pay their fair share while financially discouraging unhealthy behavior.

If you are on medicaid because you're mentally ill and you take meds for that that cause you to gain weight, where do you fit in this scheme?

Why not just tax obesity on the front end by taxing unhealthy food? And put that towards public health initiatives?

Also, it is good to think about food stamps as an agribusiness/grocery store subsidy just as much as a subsidy for the poor. Where do you draw the nutritional line on what food is stamp eligible? Would be messy and impossible to parse and govern once big lobbyists got into it.

It seems again like just putting extra tax on high added sugar food is your best bet.

 

[Transference]

Like we've eradicated the drug problem? Yep, throw more $$$ and laws at it.....it shall go away.

More laws & government equals more waste and little to no solution.

Time after time we're reminded of this and people still think it's a solution.

If we regulated fat people anywhere close to how we regulate drugs, I'm 100% on board. Example...

Schedule V: People with excellent health and eating habits. We should all aspire to be these people.

Schedule IV: People that are a little chunky, but diet regularly and hit the gym once a week. Little to nothing needs to be done here as they seem to be somewhat on top of their lifestyle. Maybe a life coach meeting every six months.

Schedule III: Making our way into the fats here. Rarely workout (walking around the mall, taking kids to the park, etc. are considered "exercise"), and consume 500 calories more than they expend each day. These people need to have yearly check-ups and there are sugar/carb limits involved.

Schedule II: These are fat people. Borderline diabetic and get winded easily going up stairs. These people require monthly check-ins and are only allowed to purchase foods off of predetermined lists.

Schedule I: These people are obese. They fake injuries to get out of physical activities and will use a rascal chair every time it is an option. Their food intake is limited and only sent to them in small quantities so they learn rationing. They also have to wear a big red F on all their clothes so we can mock them into submission to better dieting and workout habits. Required to wear a remote device at all times to track BMI and location.

Should still only cost a fraction of our spend on regulating drugs, and it would save us 100x the cost in lower health care costs across the board.

 

[amynhop]

These responses just show how few in our country are able to think for themselves. If you can’t understand this, then how the hell are you going to know why sodium nitrate and high fructose corn syrup don’t make your lean cuisine microwaveable meal an ideal choice.

Shows how few in this country are able to think for themselves??? GTFO with that.
Guess we should all aspire to think like you and Taint. This board is always entertaining.
Have a good afternoon, gentlemen.

 

[tigerfs]

The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
-- Ronald Reagan

 

[TigerDutch]

If we regulated fat people anywhere close to how we regulate drugs, I'm 100% on board. Example...

Schedule V: People with excellent health and eating habits. We should all aspire to be these people.

Schedule IV: People that are a little chunky, but diet regularly and hit the gym once a week. Little to nothing needs to be done here as they seem to be somewhat on top of their lifestyle. Maybe a life coach meeting every six months.

Schedule III: Making our way into the fats here. Rarely workout (walking around the mall, taking kids to the park, etc. are considered "exercise"), and consume 500 calories more than they expend each day. These people need to have yearly check-ups and there are sugar/carb limits involved.

Schedule II: These are fat people. Borderline diabetic and get winded easily going up stairs. These people require monthly check-ins and are only allowed to purchase foods off of predetermined lists.

Schedule I: These people are obese. They fake injuries to get out of physical activities and will use a rascal chair every time it is an option. Their food intake is limited and only sent to them in small quantities so they learn rationing. They also have to wear a big red F on all their clothes so we can mock them into submission to better dieting and workout habits. Required to wear a remote device at all times to track BMI and location.

Should still only cost a fraction of our spend on regulating drugs, and it would save us 100x the cost in lower health care costs across the board.

Like a good German. Congrats.

 

[TAINT_PAINT]

WASN"T A PACKAGED RESPONSE> when I say it, I mean it. I don't want the govt telling me what to do. I really don't. And I'm sure the UK isn't doing this to get rid of all the fats over there, or others who are a drain on their health system. I'm not sure why they're doing it, but w the number of cigarette smokers over there, I suppose I'd believe they're concerned about public health if they put a cap on the amount of cigarettes each citizen is allowed to smoke. Now, don't misunderstand. I'm not suggesting the govt should do that. I personally HATE smoking, but just like eating crappy food, it seems like a personal decision to me.

THE SAME LOGIC SHOULD ABSOLUTELY APPLY TO TOBACCO.

ACTUALLY, IT'S GREAT THAT YOU BROUGHT UP TOBACCO. A GENERATION AGO, A LOT OF PEOPLE WANTED THE GOV'T TO STOP TRYING TO REGULATE TOBACCO, ESPECIALLY WARNING LABELS. FOR DECADES, INDUSTRY LOBBYISTS WERE ABLE TO HOLD BACK MOUNTAINS OF EVIDENCE UNTIL IT FINALLY CAME TO LIGHT. AS WE HAVE SEEN, SMOKING IS ON THE DECLINE BUT IT WILL LIKELY TAKE GENERATIONS TO TOTALLY HAVE IT PHASED OUT.

BACK TO FOOD, THE SAME THING IS HAPPENING WITH THE FOOD LOBBY. THE SUBSIDIES STAY HIGH FOR THE RAW MATERIALS THAT MAKE CRAPPY FOOD - WHICH MAKES IT CHEAP - WHICH MAKES IT MORE ATTAINABLE - MEANING IT'S CONSUMED MORE - AND FINALLY, CAUSES HEALTH CONSEQUENCES.

SO YOU DON'T LIKE THE GOV'T TELLING YOU WHAT TO DO. THAT'S FAIR. BUT JUST STOP AND THINK ABOUT THE FACT THAT YOU'RE OK WITH SUBSIDIZING SHITTY FOOD WHICH ULTIMATELY CAUSES HEALTH PROBLEMS WHICH WE ALSO PAY FOR.

I GUESS YOU'RE OK WITH THAT FOR WHAT REASON AGAIN?

 

[NorthStateTiger]

#1 should change to "stop subsidizing all foods ... including corn, soy, beef, chicken, pork, all dairy products, etc."

#2 should change to "only allow food stamps to be used for whole plant foods"

"low carb" is such a falsehood because people mistakenly group good carbs with bad carbs. our bodies are made to run on good carbohydrates (see: whole plant foods in their natural, unprocessed state)

This is a popular local food talking point, but I don't buy it.

Corn, soy, etc... have a price determined on a global market. If we stopped subsidizing them, the prices wouldn't shoot up where they would become more expensive than healthier foods so much as US producers would just become noncompetitive.

We would end up drinking cokes filled with brazilian corn syrup that cost basically the same amount.

 

[Transference]

Like a good German. Congrats.

So protecting healthy people's rights to not have to pay for fat people makes one a Nazi? Okay internet argument guy that has to result to Nazi comments because you don't have any other answers.

 

[TAINT_PAINT]

Shows how few in this country are able to think for themselves??? GTFO with that.
Guess we should all aspire to think like you and Taint. This board is always entertaining.
Have a good afternoon, gentlemen.

WHAT HE MEANS IS WE HAVE A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING YOUR LOGIC. THAT'S BECAUSE YOU'RE WIRED TO COUNTER WITH A SMALL NUMBER OF RESPONSES. THAT'S OK, BUT WE ARE JUST LETTING YOU KNOW IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE SOMETIMES.

NOW LET'S SEE THIS BIKINI.