State Funded Slimming Classes

Bear said:
How do you know they don't pay their way? Do you pay your way or are you a net drain on society ? How does being a thick peasant factor into your pay your way ideal?
Click to expand...

I don't know, maybe you could shed some light on what being a thick peasant is like? :p

And to answer your other question, I would say I am not a net drain on society. If I were to become a net drain on society then chances are it would be accidental, by means that were beyond my control i.e not eating lots of bad things and living a sedentary lifestyle.
 
Last edited:
ZXSpectrum said:
In what way does being overweight have any sort of impact on most types of work?.
Click to expand...

The company I work for (college) has 500 staff. There's a major sickness problem. Repeat offenders for want of a better word. With the exception of a few, theyre all overweight or obese. Thats the common link between them all.

I think its a waste of money sending folks to weight watchers type places. These type of clubs started out in the 70s(oddly enough, when obesity started to rise, no surprise there). We have a fair few from work doing these clubs, they've been going and paying their money over for years and years, convinced it works for them...not one of them is anywhere near the right weight. Never have been. And really never will be. The diets they sell do not work long term.

The food industry is unrecognisable now, its completely lopsided in favour of processed foods. Supermarkets etc. stocking around 75% of their aisles with processed foods. The only way to change it is for everyone to realise the harm its doing, and stop buying this rubbish being passed off as food.

Proper nutrition education is needed, and not from companies who sell readymade processed food then calling it 'healthy'.
 
Captain Planet said:
I don't know, maybe you could shed some light on what being a thick peasant is like? :p

And to answer your other question, I would say I am not a net drain on society. If I were to become a net drain on society then chances are it would be accidental, by means that were beyond my control i.e not eating lots of bad things and living a sedentary lifestyle.
Click to expand...

If you aren't within the higher rate tax bracket then you are a net drain so are you a net drain? Both my wife and I individually are net contributors by a large margin.
 
Fat people should get off the diet coke etc that just makes you worse. ;)

Been in the chippy many of times and some lard asks for a portion of chips and a diet coke. :rolleyes:

I am very lucky as I am 5ft 10 and 9.5st have been since I was 16 I am now
41. I do not exercise and I do not eat healthy and I smoke and drink. :D

But..............

I do not do much in the day so I dont eat much, some days I eat nothing virtualy.

When I have done manual labour filling skips, mixing for plasters etc I eat
like a monster, breakfast bacon on, dinner saus dinner and a bloody big tea,
oh yes I can eat when I doing that stuff. ;)

Look at what you do in a day if you have done nothing you deserve nothing food wise. :cool:

On topic, NO! we should not be paying for fat people to get slim. You fat
your problem, I am a smoker my problem but I pay for it in taxes, so no fat people need education not free slimming classes.

Neurotoxin artificial sweeteners do not work they make you worse!
Stay away! :mad:
 
Bear said:
If you aren't within the higher rate tax bracket then you are a net drain so are you a net drain? Both my wife and I individually are net contributors by a large margin.
Click to expand...

I pay what the state declares I should contribute. Therefore the point is that the state should declare that fat people should contribute more. Whether I am high tax band or not is irrelevant. Thank you for sharing your epeen, happy for you. Out of interest, are you and your wife fat?
 
Captain Planet said:
I pay what the state declares I should contribute. Therefore the point is that the state should declare that fat people should contribute more. Whether I am high tax band or not is irrelevant. Thank you for sharing your epeen, happy for you. Out of interest, are you and your wife fat?
Click to expand...

What constitutes a "fat" person, though? It would need to be clearly defined in your Utopia, and we all know (I assume) that BMI is pretty much useless in that regard.
 
It's easy to say that they should just eat less or do exercise or just sort it out themselves but the fact that they are fat means that they arn't doing these things and the people they know arn't helping them. Just because it's easy for most people doesn't mean it is for them. If the government doesn't help then who will. It makes me feel bad to see people at work or in the street overweight. It is a serious health problem and these people will have shorter lives. It should be taken much more seriously and at the moment our culture is to just ignore it as if it is normal. Also some of these people have other problems. Usually lack of things to do or people to give them something to do so instead they just sit on the sofa eating. The money spent on looking after these people once tbey get obese would be better spent to help them earlier.
 
Captain Planet said:
I pay what the state declares I should contribute. Therefore the point is that the state should declare that fat people should contribute more. Whether I am high tax band or not is irrelevant. Thank you for sharing your epeen, happy for you. Out of interest, are you and your wife fat?
Click to expand...

Good dodge sponger, you also answered the question about intelligence ;). Perhaps you should pay your own way before you condemn others to do so.

It's also ironic that you like to thank me for sharing my epeen when all I was illustrating the folly of looking down on someone based on the position you and they are in. I didn't expect you to understand but I will spell it out for you. You look down on fat people because you like to feel morally superior to them as you think they should pay their way despite not knowing what they put into the system and because of your prejudice, and I was trying to illustrate that you don't pay your way because you obviously aren't intelligent enough and that there is always someone else that can look down on you.

In reality I don't care how much people put into the system but was illustrating anyone can take a position of looking down on someone.

To answer your question, yes I am over weight but a couple of days ago I had a health check and my blood pressure is normal, my resting heart rate is 56bpm, my blood cholesterol is fine and I don't have diabetes. I also haven't needed any medical treatment for 24 years when I came of my motorbike
 
Last edited:
Pestilence said:
What constitutes a "fat" person, though? It would need to be clearly defined in your Utopia, and we all know (I assume) that BMI is pretty much useless in that regard.
Click to expand...

Why don't you ask your doctor, there are many ways to measure a person's body fat. BMI is rubbish, it suggests I am overweight.
Bear said:
Good dodge sponger, you also answered the question about intelligence ;). Perhaps you should pay your own way before you condemn others to do so.

It's also ironic that you like to thank me for sharing my epeen when all I was illustrating the folly of looking down on someone based on the position you and they are in. I didn't expect you to understand but I will spell it out for you. You look down on fat people because you like to feel morally superior to them as you think they should pay their way despite not knowing what they put into the system and because of your prejudice, and I was trying to illustrate that you don't pay your way because you obviously aren't intelligent enough and that there is always someone else that can look down on you.

In reality I don't care how much people put into the system but was illustrating anyone can take a position of looking down on someone.

To answer your question, yes I am over weight but a couple of days ago I had a health check and my blood pressure is normal, my resting heart rate is 56bpm, my blood cholesterol is fine and I don't have diabetes. I also haven't needed any medical treatment for 24 years when I came of my motorbike
Click to expand...

If it appeases you, yes a certain amount of my salary above £32k is taxed at the 40% bracket. I don't think my taxed income contribution has any factor in this, it is you trying to suggest a net drain vs net gain scenario in this matter, you brought it up. I simply see that overweight people should contribute fairly, as do smokers and drinkers.

Nice though, the irony is great that you yourself believe you can look down, and also make such wild assumptions. "I didn't expect you to understand" come on now, don't be daft soft lad.
 
Captain Planet said:
If it appeases you, yes a certain amount of my salary above £32k is taxed at the 40% bracket. I don't think my taxed income contribution has any factor in this, it is you trying to suggest a net drain vs net gain scenario in this matter, you brought it up. I simply see that overweight people should contribute fairly, as do smokers and drinkers.

Nice though, the irony is great that you yourself believe you can look down, and also make such wild assumptions. "I didn't expect you to understand" come on now, don't be daft soft lad.
Click to expand...

Good God, the net drain point was that you don't know how much someone contributes so someone being fat itself is no indication that they are a drain on the system. If someone pays £40k in tax a year, do you honestly think a few quid in tax on junk food means they pay their way?

If you ask people to contribute their fair share then logically you could ask anyone to do so if they aren't a net contributor.

There also was no irony as I stated quite clearly it was an illustration to show you the folly of being judgemental of others, it obviously went over your head.
 
Bear said:
Good God, the net drain point was that you don't know how much someone contributes so someone being fat itself is no indication that they are a drain on the system. If someone pays £40k in tax a year, do you honestly think a few quid in tax on junk food means they pay their way?

If you ask people to contribute their fair share then logically you could ask anyone to do so if they aren't a net contributor.

There also was no irony as I stated quite clearly it was an illustration to show you the folly of being judgemental of others, it obviously went over your head.
Click to expand...

Or perhaps you just didn't itterate it correctly, tried to make an invalid point about net contribtuor vs net drain and then felt that by throwing an insult about intelligence it some how might have helped bolster your argument.

What I was suggesting from the start was that no matter whether you are earning tax free, mid bracket, or 40%, you should have a tax against you for being fat. I never mentioned this concept of being a drain, it is something you incorrectly inferred. By "paying their way" I am simply suggesting that should someone be fat, they should be made to pay for it as is reasonably decided. To me, the concept of being obese and then receiving free treatment for it verges in the stupidity of people who have breast implants on the NHS. I think it's ludicrous, when the money could be used for more life threatening conditions that people had no choice in contracting. The crux of that example is that a fat person can quite easily do something to remedy their fat state, the breast implant girl probably had a much more deep seeded mental issue. You don't need to spend millions of NHS money to tell someone that eating less cake and getting up off their ass will rectify their problem.

So to your question then, if the NHS are providing more suport to overweight people, then yes I do believe that a "few quid in tax" will help considerably because in real terms, it won't be just a few quid will it? Whether it be some kind of fat related income tax or (more viably) a high duty on junk food, that will result in a lot more than just a few quid. Such a contribution will not only raise revenues to contribute to the stretched NHS, it will also avert people from eating the junk in the first place. Several colleagues quit smoking based solely on the cost it brought to them compared to when they started.



Does my point make sense to you? I hope it does, but I'm not confident you will understand and it will go over your head, because only stupid people allow themselves to get fat. See I can do it too ;)
 
Last edited:
Captain Planet said:
Or perhaps you just didn't itterate it correctly, tried to make an invalid point about net contribtuor vs net drain and then felt that by throwing an insult about intelligence it some how might have helped bolster your argument.

What I was suggesting from the start was that no matter whether you are earning tax free, mid bracket, or 40%, you should have a tax against you for being fat. I never mentioned this concept of being a drain, it is something you incorrectly inferred. By "paying their way" I am simply suggesting that should someone be fat, they should be made to pay for it as is reasonably decided. To me, the concept of being obese and then receiving free treatment for it verges in the stupidity of people who have breast implants on the NHS. I think it's ludicrous, when the money could be used for more life threatening conditions that people had no choice in contracting. The crux of that example is that a fat person can quite easily do something to remedy their fat state, the breast implant girl probably had a much more deep seeded mental issue. You don't need to spend millions of NHS money to tell someone that eating less cake and getting up off their ass will rectify their problem.

So to your question then, if the NHS are providing more suport to overweight people, then yes I do believe that a "few quid in tax" will help considerably because in real terms, it won't be just a few quid will it? Whether it be some kind of fat related income tax or (more viably) a high duty on junk food, that will result in a lot more than just a few quid. Such a contribution will not only raise revenues to contribute to the stretched NHS, it will also avert people from eating the junk in the first place. Several colleagues quit smoking based solely on the cost it brought to them compared to when they started.

Does my point make sense to you? I hope it does, but I'm not confident you will understand and it will go over your head, because only stupid people allow themselves to get fat. See I can do it too ;)
Click to expand...

Your point has been clear right from the start, only you don't see your own hypocrisy. I am not opposed to a tax on junk food and as suggested in a post in Speakers Corner, I would happily see the tax on junk food and the money raised, used to help lower cost on healthy food so poorer people can eat healthily more cheaply.

I only used intelligence as an example of the lame way of attacking a section of society for not paying their way, the same attitude you exhibit by demonising a section of society you obviously are prejudiced against. In reality I care not how much someone contributes or how fat they are or that they are from Romania, it's all BS that diverts from the real issues and have idiots demonising different sections of society.
 
Captain Planet said:
Why don't you ask your doctor, there are many ways to measure a person's body fat. BMI is rubbish, it suggests I am overweight.
Click to expand...

That wasn't the question. BMI is no good, so it would have to be calipers etc. for measurement.

The question is: What body fat percentage would need to be exceeded for tax to set in?

What about internal fat? It's perfectly possible to have a low dermal fat percentage, but have quite a bit lining organs internally. This would put you at greater risk of adverse health effects than someone who may measure very similarly on an external check. Should everybody thus be subjected to scans as well to determine this?
 
Last edited:
Slimming classes only work if the person wants to lose weight, you still have to make effort as it doesn't magically just drop off. People are just lazy and are happy being fat so I doubt it would work for many anyway.
 
Pestilence said:
The question is: What body fat percentage would need to be exceeded for tax to set in?
Click to expand...

The answer to that would be generated by the chancellor and co I would assume?

Pestilence said:
What about internal fat? It's perfectly possible to have a low dermal fat percentage, but have quite a bit lining organs internally. This would put you at greater risk of adverse health effects than someone who may measure very similarly on an external check. Should everybody thus be subjected to scans as well to determine this?
Click to expand...

Perhaps.

Bear said:
I am not opposed to a tax on junk food and as suggested in a post in Speakers Corner, I would happily see the tax on junk food and the money raised, used to help lower cost on healthy food so poorer people can eat healthily more cheaply.
Click to expand...

Then we are agreed on something.

I'm not demonising fat people, perhaps fat people are just being very defensive. "Oh no, you called me fat, I'm offended!" whilst stuffing face with cake.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom