Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 4
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Sat May 09, 2009 10:50 am    Post subject: A tax on fat people? Reply with quote

I think we should implement a progressive system of taxation on fat people. Given your height you know your healthy weight range. If you are 10% over your healthy weight you pay a 10% surtax on your income taxes - 20% = 20% surtax.

According to this...

http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/631583

It would help stave off global warming and it would save billions in health care costs. Before you go off on "we don't need more taxes" - I would recommend that people within the healthy range have their taxes reduced by a revenue neutral amount.

We could also make a reality television show that tracks the biggest gainer and the biggest loser.
NorthernRaven





Joined: 10 Feb 2009
Posts: 160
Reputation: 22.8Reputation: 22.8
votes: 2
Location: Ottawa

PostPosted: Sat May 09, 2009 12:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Craig I sincerly hope you a being sarcastic because that is one of the stupidist and dangerous ideas in taxation.

1) Body Mass Index definition - a line will have to be drawn. For a person like me who it 6 foot 5 inches, at 210 lbs has a healthy BMI, and I lok fairly. But if I put on 40 pounds of extra weight, I'll still have a normal look, but that would exceed the BMI risk zone. So there are several problems in the calculations, because it does NOT take into account your other health risks, be they genetic, smoking, etc.

2) The yearly weigh-in would be a gross infringement of your privacy (even though your weight is listed on your drivers liscence), but would increase the burocracy of the CRA to manage this addition information for 33 million individuals.

3) Medical exemption, where there are genetic cases or other reasons why certain individuals can not lose the weight to their desired BMI.

4) It's a bad idea, because it is another fucking tax. Frankly there are better ways to tackle the health care costs in the country that this ill-though scheme.
Skinny Dipper





Joined: 14 Dec 2008
Posts: 32
Reputation: 12.5

PostPosted: Sat May 09, 2009 12:47 pm    Post subject: I don't think Stephen Harper would support this idea Reply with quote

I don't think the rotund PM would support a Santa fat tax. :lol:
Northern Ontario Tory





Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Posts: 567
Reputation: 44.4Reputation: 44.4Reputation: 44.4Reputation: 44.4
votes: 5

PostPosted: Sat May 09, 2009 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why not go "whole hog" and just tax the hell out of any product that is deemed to be unhealthy? Smokes and booze have long been the sin taxed items, I'm sure the nanny state could easily jump on board and add a fat tax. Want a chocolate bar or a bag of chips or anything deep fried , you can still have it if you pay much more. But why stop there? Next we could add a tax on those who have a lower than average IQ (or their parents), since they will tend to be lower earning and less productive in society and likely also be a greater burden on the health care / social service system. After that we could tax anyone who manages to get sunburned which increases their risk of skin cancer or to catch an STD through unprotected sex since their poor choices are also a drain on the public system. I'm sure we could go on and on and on .....

Needless to say, I'm against the concept. Personal freedom allows one and all to make choices, both good and bad, and they should be prepared to accept the consequences of poor decisions. Maybe I won't live as long as I could have because I like to stay up late on the weekend, or to indulge in BBQ red meat and potatoes and cold Canadian beer in the summer, but after a long day at work I really don't care. For me and the family it is a relaxing time together, which is just as important.

The scary thing is that some left-leaning government would probably use some asinine "study" to justify a new tax.
SFrank85





Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2269
Reputation: 59.8
votes: 4
Location: Toronto - Scarborough Southwest

PostPosted: Sat May 09, 2009 1:49 pm    Post subject: Re: A tax on fat people? Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
I think we should implement a progressive system of taxation on fat people. Given your height you know your healthy weight range. If you are 10% over your healthy weight you pay a 10% surtax on your income taxes - 20% = 20% surtax.

According to this...

http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/631583

It would help stave off global warming and it would save billions in health care costs. Before you go off on "we don't need more taxes" - I would recommend that people within the healthy range have their taxes reduced by a revenue neutral amount.

We could also make a reality television show that tracks the biggest gainer and the biggest loser.


Another great idea from the Toronto Star! Maybe we should start with their editorial board first, then on to their employees.

Next thing, we will have to line up every fat person and shoot them in the back of the head, because it does not ‘fit’ with the government standards.
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Sat May 09, 2009 2:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NorthernRaven wrote:
Craig I sincerly hope you a being sarcastic because that is one of the stupidist and dangerous ideas in taxation.


Yes - sarcastic. But I think it is funny. Especially the notion that fat people cause global warming. Fat people should be subject to cap and trade.
ezbeatz





Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 1140
Reputation: 49.5Reputation: 49.5Reputation: 49.5Reputation: 49.5Reputation: 49.5
votes: 10
Location: Vaughan, ON

PostPosted: Sat May 09, 2009 3:54 pm    Post subject: Re: A tax on fat people? Reply with quote

Craig wrote:
I think we should implement a progressive system of taxation on fat people. Given your height you know your healthy weight range. If you are 10% over your healthy weight you pay a 10% surtax on your income taxes - 20% = 20% surtax.


Hey, my BMI is 29 which puts me almost at the obese level. Except I have a body fat % of 8-9. I'm a really fit, muscular athlete but according to the body mass index I'm fat as hell.
don muntean





Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 2262
Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9
votes: 8
Location: Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Sat May 09, 2009 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NorthernRaven wrote:
Craig I sincerly hope you a being sarcastic because that is one of the stupidist and dangerous ideas in taxation.

1) Body Mass Index definition - a line will have to be drawn. For a person like me who it 6 foot 5 inches, at 210 lbs has a healthy BMI, and I lok fairly. But if I put on 40 pounds of extra weight, I'll still have a normal look, but that would exceed the BMI risk zone. So there are several problems in the calculations, because it does NOT take into account your other health risks, be they genetic, smoking, etc.

2) The yearly weigh-in would be a gross infringement of your privacy (even though your weight is listed on your drivers liscence), but would increase the burocracy of the CRA to manage this addition information for 33 million individuals.

3) Medical exemption, where there are genetic cases or other reasons why certain individuals can not lose the weight to their desired BMI.

4) It's a bad idea, because it is another fucking tax. Frankly there are better ways to tackle the health care costs in the country that this ill-though scheme.


Why the need for that cuss word??
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Sat May 09, 2009 8:06 pm    Post subject: Re: A tax on fat people? Reply with quote

ezbeatz wrote:
Hey, my BMI is 29 which puts me almost at the obese level. Except I have a body fat % of 8-9. I'm a really fit, muscular athlete but according to the body mass index I'm fat as hell.


Fair enough - we'll do it by % body fat then ;)
kwlafayette





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 6155
Reputation: 156.2Reputation: 156.2
votes: 28
Location: Saskatoon Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Sun May 10, 2009 12:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maybe we could also have a mandatory daily exercise period. Of course, there would have to be some way to make sure that everyone took part. Maybe some kind of 2 way view screen, or telescreen, that could not be turned off could be installed in every room of every home?

All kidding aside, exactly how does this make the government smaller and less intrusive? How does this help stop the incremental gains of socialism?
SFrank85





Joined: 03 Mar 2007
Posts: 2269
Reputation: 59.8
votes: 4
Location: Toronto - Scarborough Southwest

PostPosted: Sun May 10, 2009 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kwlafayette wrote:
Maybe we could also have a mandatory daily exercise period. Of course, there would have to be some way to make sure that everyone took part. Maybe some kind of 2 way view screen, or telescreen, that could not be turned off could be installed in every room of every home?

All kidding aside, exactly how does this make the government smaller and less intrusive? How does this help stop the incremental gains of socialism?


It is just another move towards the socialist nanny state. Keep your eyes on your wallet… and your children!
RuralandRight





Joined: 30 Dec 2008
Posts: 618
Reputation: 41.5Reputation: 41.5Reputation: 41.5Reputation: 41.5
votes: 5
Location: Rural Canada

PostPosted: Sun May 10, 2009 10:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Isn't there already a 'sin' tax on fast food and junk food?
Craig
Site Admin




Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 4415
Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8Reputation: 47.8
votes: 36

PostPosted: Sun May 10, 2009 10:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kwlafayette wrote:
Maybe we could also have a mandatory daily exercise period.


No - I'm not in favor of regulation.

Quote:
All kidding aside, exactly how does this make the government smaller and less intrusive? How does this help stop the incremental gains of socialism?


If I have to pay the health care bills of fat people shouldn't I have a say? We tax smokers.
teabag





Joined: 30 Nov 2008
Posts: 501
Reputation: 118.7
votes: 6
Location: Mississauga Ontario

PostPosted: Sun May 10, 2009 11:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What about people with large lungs and big noses? Perhaps they take in more oxygen and exhale more carbon dioxide.

Maybe cap and trade? And while we are on the subject of an exercise program don't you think that there should be an outright ban on electric treadmills draining the power grid. Afterall nature provides us with lots of outdoor space and it is downright delightful during the months of January and February. The downside to that plan is we lose the taxes on said treadmill, now how do we recoup our losses.?

Really and don't fat people have enough to deal with already with our thin youth culture. Enough already.


Last edited by teabag on Sun May 10, 2009 11:59 am; edited 2 times in total
Sylia





Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 2
Reputation: 39.3Reputation: 39.3Reputation: 39.3Reputation: 39.3
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Sun May 10, 2009 11:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Slippery slope here, Craig.

By extension of your argument, why should I have to pay health costs for such things as:

-Treatement of Anorexia
-Rescuing mountain climbers or victims of avanlanches who were clearly in well marked no go areas of their own volition.
-Orthopeadic operations for young joggers or weekend atheletes
-Pediatric care for litters of pre-mature babies resulting from the abuse of fertility drugs
-Termination of pregnancies where there is no medical reason for termination.
-Permanent care of children born with medical conditions when their parents were warned in advance of the potential for this to happen and they go ahead with the pregnancy anyway...and then go on and do it a few more times against medical advice, with the same results, before finally giving up

Certainly these are extreme examples, but a case could be made for any one of these because the one thing that they have in common is that they are all self induced.

-You cannot be an Anorexic without consciously stoping eating and deliberately over exercising.
-No one suddenly appears on a mountainside, or finds themselve magically transported outside of a safe ski area.
-You have to consciously choose to put on running shoes and abuse your joints and bones beyond normal wear and tear on an ongoing basis to require orthapedic surgery.
-Those fertility drugs aren't available in vending machines and don't put themselves into someone's body.
-Given the sheer amount of sex education, it would be difficult to find anyone with a reasonable mental capacity who understands the net results of putting Tab A into Slot B. If they do not have that mental capacity, should they even be doing so?
-Medical science has come a long way in both pre-natal diagnostics and genetic pre-screening. I can understand taking a chance on a first child, on the thought that perhaps the diagnosis is incorrect, but having that happen multiple times?

Fat people are an easy target because people feel that it's all about lifestyle choice. Sometimes it is, and sometimes it is not. Consider the following:

-You have a condition where the doctor proscribes a steroid, only they keep you on it for too long. One side effect of Prednisone, for an example, is extreme weight gain even if you were a normally active human being. The longer you are on it, the more weight you can gain, and getting rid of it is no simple matter. You'd penalize someone for this?
-Hypothyroidism: One of the side effects of this condition is weight gain, and again its damnedably difficult to lose once its on. You can be as active as anyone else, and eat less and much healthier than the average person and still have weight issues. Would you equate someone like that to a Twinkie prince/princess?

Over to you, o wise one.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 4

Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


A tax on fat people?

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB