Germany Weighs Tax on the Obese.

Gerald · 07-24-10, 12:09 PM

(July 23) -- A tax on fat?

Marco Wanderwitz, a conservative member of parliament for the German state of Saxony, said it is unfair and unsustainable for the taxpayer to carry the entire cost of treating obesity-related illnesses in the public health system.

http://www.aolnews.com/world/article...obese/19566425

tater · 07-24-10, 12:23 PM

Vendor will be here all week. Remember, well drinks are $5 today...

antikristuseke · 07-24-10, 12:30 PM

They are fat and therefore wrong!

Torvald Von Mansee · 07-24-10, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vendor

(July 23) -- A tax on fat?

Marco Wanderwitz, a conservative member of parliament for the German state of Saxony, said it is unfair and unsustainable for the taxpayer to carry the entire cost of treating obesity-related illnesses in the public health system.

http://www.aolnews.com/world/article...obese/19566425

You'd NEVER see an American conservative advocate taxing the fat!!! Have you seen a video of a teabagger rally????

Gerald · 07-24-10, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tater

Vendor will be here all week. Remember, well drinks are $5 today...

All weeks?

gimpy117 · 07-24-10, 01:38 PM

good idea. heavier people mean more work for public transportation systems, healthcare etc.

August · 07-24-10, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torvald Von Mansee

You'd NEVER see an American conservative advocate taxing the fat!!! Have you seen a video of a teabagger rally????

Yet more proof that liberals are a cancer upon society. American conservatives don't believe in taxing every single aspect of a persons existence.

Skybird · 07-24-10, 02:36 PM

That guy is a nobody from third row, and currently we have a summer hole.

However, it is common habit that high risk sports for example demand special , separate health insurrances. I think for certain aspects of a person's normal living ways it is worth to think about not making the whole community needing to pay if this person behaves silly. I would therefore exclude smoking-related diseases from the normal health insurrance contracts. Drugs and alcohol abuse also are to be considered, though you have to differentiate the individual cases.

To consider bad eating habits and food abuse (especially sugar, but also fats, bad carbonhydrates, salt) for exclusion from normal health insurrance protection, of course would demand solid mandatory food education at schools, too. Since that is difficult to be implemented, penalising taxes on such products beign sold indeed might be a way. These taxes then go into a font that is reserved for treatement of diseases that are related to bad food.

that leaves people the freedom to eat every sh!t they want. They only have to accept the reponsibility and need to accept that the community does not pay for their stupdity, but that they have to finace the consequences of their silly behavior all by themselves. That is freedom, coupled with responsibility. Way to go!

It is a fact that obesity and bad food causes billions in costs for which the community has to pay, although the affected persons have it withoin their reach not to become obese - by learning more facts about what they eat, and eating less industrially prepared sh!t, and less sugar and fats. The times when only the US where the country with many fat people, unfortunately are long since gone. It is said that Germany leads the pack of European fat nations now. And when I read that up to 20% of kids at elementary school cannot work backwards and cannot balance on one leg for half a minute because they are too fat, then this rings an alarm bell.

Captain Vlad · 07-24-10, 02:37 PM

Furthermore, how do they plan on defining "obese?" Weight? BMI? Circumference?

Are they going to end up taxing body builders with lots of heavy muscle mass? Will there be an appeals system where one may claim one is merely 'big boned'?

What a stupid idea.

tater · 07-24-10, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torvald Von Mansee

You'd NEVER see an American conservative advocate taxing the fat!!! Have you seen a video of a teabagger rally????

Non-hispanic white males (a CDC grouping, not mine) are slightly more likely to be obese than hispanics and blacks. Below 40, the minorities are grossly more likely to be obese. For women, non-hispanic whites are the least obese, hispanic and black women are obese in far higher %s.

Tea party is mostly white males I guess, so it makes sense with 30-40% having obese BMIs.

Of course since black women vote over 90% democrat, we could say that democrats are 50-something to 60-something % obese.

To the extent the poor are more "left" you can also say that the same demographic is fatter, too. Wealth is inversely correlated with obesity.

Yawn. Weight has nothing to do with politics.

Jimbuna · 07-24-10, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Vlad

Furthermore, how do they plan on defining "obese?" Weight? BMI? Circumference?

Are they going to end up taxing body builders with lots of heavy muscle mass? Will there be an appeals system where one may claim one is merely 'big boned'?

What a stupid idea.

I like it

I hope the wife doesn't read this

tater · 07-24-10, 03:08 PM

If you cede your healthcare liberty to the State, then the public at large has a compelling interest in any activities you do that negatively impacts their pocketbooks (taxes), wait times for the doctor, etc.

It's only fair.

Smokers should be taxed. Tubs of goo. People who do dangerous sports, or drive too fast.

In private insurance, that's why they should be able to charge what they want premium wise. Once politicians start saying they cannot charge more for stuff that clearly costs more, the insurance companies go out of business. Then the government wioll come along and do the exact same thing, LOL---but unlike insurance, you can't shop around.

07-24-10, 12:09 PM	#1
Gerald SUBSIM Newsman Join Date: May 2008 Location: Close to sea Posts: 24,254 Downloads: 553 Uploads: 0	Germany Weighs Tax on the Obese. (July 23) -- A tax on fat? Marco Wanderwitz, a conservative member of parliament for the German state of Saxony, said it is unfair and unsustainable for the taxpayer to carry the entire cost of treating obesity-related illnesses in the public health system. http://www.aolnews.com/world/article...obese/19566425 __________________ Nothing in life is to be feard,it is only to be understood. Marie Curie

07-24-10, 01:38 PM	#6
gimpy117 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Kalamazoo, MI Posts: 3,243 Downloads: 108 Uploads: 0	good idea. heavier people mean more work for public transportation systems, healthcare etc. __________________ Member of the Subsim Zombie Army

07-24-10, 02:36 PM	#8
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,603 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	That guy is a nobody from third row, and currently we have a summer hole. However, it is common habit that high risk sports for example demand special , separate health insurrances. I think for certain aspects of a person's normal living ways it is worth to think about not making the whole community needing to pay if this person behaves silly. I would therefore exclude smoking-related diseases from the normal health insurrance contracts. Drugs and alcohol abuse also are to be considered, though you have to differentiate the individual cases. To consider bad eating habits and food abuse (especially sugar, but also fats, bad carbonhydrates, salt) for exclusion from normal health insurrance protection, of course would demand solid mandatory food education at schools, too. Since that is difficult to be implemented, penalising taxes on such products beign sold indeed might be a way. These taxes then go into a font that is reserved for treatement of diseases that are related to bad food. that leaves people the freedom to eat every sh!t they want. They only have to accept the reponsibility and need to accept that the community does not pay for their stupdity, but that they have to finace the consequences of their silly behavior all by themselves. That is freedom, coupled with responsibility. Way to go! It is a fact that obesity and bad food causes billions in costs for which the community has to pay, although the affected persons have it withoin their reach not to become obese - by learning more facts about what they eat, and eating less industrially prepared sh!t, and less sugar and fats. The times when only the US where the country with many fat people, unfortunately are long since gone. It is said that Germany leads the pack of European fat nations now. And when I read that up to 20% of kids at elementary school cannot work backwards and cannot balance on one leg for half a minute because they are too fat, then this rings an alarm bell. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

07-24-10, 02:37 PM	#9
Captain Vlad Seasoned Skipper Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Pollard, Oklahoma Posts: 679 Downloads: 6 Uploads: 0	Furthermore, how do they plan on defining "obese?" Weight? BMI? Circumference? Are they going to end up taxing body builders with lots of heavy muscle mass? Will there be an appeals system where one may claim one is merely 'big boned'? What a stupid idea. __________________ "Stop sounding battlestations just to hear the alarm."

07-24-10, 12:23 PM	#2
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	Vendor will be here all week. Remember, well drinks are $5 today...

07-24-10, 12:30 PM	#3
antikristuseke Silent Hunter Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Estland Posts: 4,330 Downloads: 3 Uploads: 0	They are fat and therefore wrong!

07-24-10, 03:08 PM	#12
tater Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: New Mexico, USA Posts: 9,023 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 2	If you cede your healthcare liberty to the State, then the public at large has a compelling interest in any activities you do that negatively impacts their pocketbooks (taxes), wait times for the doctor, etc. It's only fair. Smokers should be taxed. Tubs of goo. People who do dangerous sports, or drive too fast. In private insurance, that's why they should be able to charge what they want premium wise. Once politicians start saying they cannot charge more for stuff that clearly costs more, the insurance companies go out of business. Then the government wioll come along and do the exact same thing, LOL---but unlike insurance, you can't shop around.