Should thin people subsidise fat people?

I think the price you pay is generally to the designer, taxes, shipping and a storefront etc, not on actual material.

Of course some bits will be different to accommodate a larger person but these will be templates made a long time ago and of no real cost to new look

It shouldn’t have cost more but if I got fat and had to pay £2 more I don’t think I would be bothered enough to cry about it, it won’t be the first pit of trousers in history priced differently
 
In India clothes have always been priced upon size, so the larger you go the more it costs, argument being more material.

But here in the west as this has never been the case it causes consternation?
 
I suspect the cost of the material, in general, is the smallest cost.
 
These people moaning are idiots! on a roll of fabric you could get 20 small shirts, 15 medium ones and 10 large ones, so why not charge more?
 
Fat people should definitely have to pay for two seats on transport if they don't fit entirely in one.
Just wrong to have someone squashing you up against the window because they need more room as in your seat.
 
tijuana taxi said:
Fat people should definitely have to pay for two seats on transport if they don't fit entirely in one.
Just wrong to have someone squashing you up against the window because they need more room as in your seat.
Click to expand...

I think you posted in the wrong thread
But whilst we're here....what about people who smell. People with annoying small children. Boring people. I think they should all pay more.
 
viv1969 said:
I think you posted in the wrong thread
But whilst we're here....what about people who smell. People with annoying small children. Boring people. I think they should all pay more.
Click to expand...

Well going by the title I'm paying for the extra half seat their bum is occupying.
 
What about the airline that charged passengers by weight?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22001256

It's interesting to see what BBC readers thought, judging by the comments that had the most upvotes:
  1. "FINALLY!! As someone of average weight, I hate paying for the overly large person next to me..."
  2. "What an excellent idea..."
  3. "About time, I hope all airlines do this..."
  4. "Sounds fair to me..."
  5. "Well done to Samoa Air!"
 
tijuana taxi said:
Fat people should definitely have to pay for two seats on transport if they don't fit entirely in one.
Just wrong to have someone squashing you up against the window because they need more room as in your seat.
Click to expand...

Well they could just make the seats human sized..
 
StewartR said:
What about the airline that charged passengers by weight?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22001256

It's interesting to see what BBC readers thought, judging by the comments that had the most upvotes:
  1. "FINALLY!! As someone of average weight, I hate paying for the overly large person next to me..."
  2. "What an excellent idea..."
  3. "About time, I hope all airlines do this..."
  4. "Sounds fair to me..."
  5. "Well done to Samoa Air!"
Click to expand...

5 years ago.
Do they still?
 
I just be happy if they could synchronize clothing sizes, I vary over 3 different sizes depending on where I buy clothes from
 
StewartR said:
What about the airline that charged passengers by weight?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22001256

It's interesting to see what BBC readers thought, judging by the comments that had the most upvotes:
  1. "FINALLY!! As someone of average weight, I hate paying for the overly large person next to me..."
  2. "What an excellent idea..."
  3. "About time, I hope all airlines do this..."
  4. "Sounds fair to me..."
  5. "Well done to Samoa Air!"
Click to expand...

Can see why an airline might want to charge more, extra weight equates to extra fuel.
What happens if someone gets on who physically cannot fit in the seat?

Bloke I worked with was huge, weighed just on 30st, his missus was huge too.
If they booked two seats no way would they have fitted
They were greedy buggers, always eating rubbish and drinking two litre bottles of coke.
Didn't walk, more like rocked along the way you move a washing machine around

Office chairs are only rated to about 20 stone, should they make bigger stronger chairs for the same price?
 
Last edited:
its weird in india be fat pay more for your clothes seems reasonable.
in UK pay more that's prejudice, obesity in the uk is now normalised
obese people just buy bigger cars, bigger clothes and have ways of just making their life normal
then diabetes and other health issues come along and the good old nhs will sort it.

oh well.....
 
viv1969 said:
5 years ago.
Do they still?
Click to expand...
It seems they are no longer operating. I don't know why.

But by a fortunate coincidence one of my mates from college was until recently the Commercial Director at Fiji Airways, and they had a JV with the Samoan government, so he might know a thing about it. I'll ask him...
 
I don't see the problem in paying more for bigger clothes. Kids clothes are often priced according to age certainly in the likes of Next and it doesn't cause too much fuss.
 
scottduffy said:
I don't see the problem in paying more for bigger clothes. Kids clothes are often priced according to age certainly in the likes of Next and it doesn't cause too much fuss.
Click to expand...

Same with supermarket school clothes, polo shirts aged 3-4 are cheaper than 9-10, cannot see the problem myself..

Maybe it just needs to be across the board as Maine in Debenhams charge the same for denims be it 30 waist or 50 so you have conflicts within the pricing structure.
 
scottduffy said:
I don't see the problem in paying more for bigger clothes. Kids clothes are often priced according to age certainly in the likes of Next and it doesn't cause too much fuss.
Click to expand...

That would appear to be sensible, but a plus size model took umbrage :)
 
Or should vegans subsidise meat eaters ,I love a bacon butty but I have to go to the shops to buy the bacon ,a vegan can simply mow the lawn and make a sarnie
 
Mr Bump said:
then diabetes and other health issues come along and the good old nhs will sort it.
Click to expand...
Interesting point.
If an obese person has 10 years of illness and dies at 50, is that more expense for the country than a slim person, living to 90 with the last 10 years in supported accommodation, presumably they’ll have had ‘some’ health conditions between 40 and 90?
My guesstimate is that people who die young are cheaper for society.
 
Phil V said:
Interesting point.
If an obese person has 10 years of illness and dies at 50, is that more expense for the country than a slim person, living to 90 with the last 10 years in supported accommodation, presumably they’ll have had ‘some’ health conditions between 40 and 90?
My guesstimate is that people who die young are cheaper for society.
Click to expand...

I was a lot slimmer when I smoked, no less future illness proof though
if the diabetes doesn't get you the COPD will

So smoking forty a day is the answer, government gets all that tax and no care home fees, just a bit of NHS chest clinic money to cough up,

Still maybe the electric steam engine fags will prove to be deadly, no evidence either way as yet
Do they really help people give up, I just called it a day, found that was the only way, tough it out with willpower.
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
My guesstimate is that people who die young are cheaper for society.
Click to expand...
That was the subject of a classic episode of "Yes, Prime Minister". The health minister has come up with a radical plan to eliminate smoking via an advertising ban and big tax rises. But Sir Humphrey points out that large numbers of people dying early save the Treasury more in terms of pensions and benefit payments than it currently pays out in medical expenses, and the plan is scuppered. It's quite plausible.
 
Phil V said:
Interesting point.
If an obese person has 10 years of illness and dies at 50, is that more expense for the country than a slim person, living to 90 with the last 10 years in supported accommodation, presumably they’ll have had ‘some’ health conditions between 40 and 90?
My guesstimate is that people who die young are cheaper for society.
Click to expand...

dunno what the answer to that is I guess, all I see we as a nation are slowly waking up to taxing a lot of products linked to obesity and diabetes etc but we as a nation seem reluctant to embrace it?

Even Coca Cola faced with the recent increased tax on high sugar coke simply reduced the can size, how does that compute?

So charging more for larger clothes seems reasonable as should it just be a further tax on obesity?

Should we also placing a tax on fats food and junk food?

but at the end of the day will it work, probably not
 
Mr Bump said:
dunno I wouldn't touch one of those with a barge pole anyhow
Click to expand...

Why not, are you a veggie or banned by religion?
Most people who say I wouldn't eat certain at certain establishments haven't actually ever tried it

Do you really believe everything is produced and prepared under sterile conditions?
 
tijuana taxi said:
Why not, are you a veggie or banned by religion?
Most people who say I wouldn't eat certain at certain establishments haven't actually ever tried it

Do you really believe everything is produced and prepared under sterile conditions?
Click to expand...

no I don't like bad sausages in a bad bun, the egg will probably ok and personally I will not purchase food at those sort of outlets due to many reasons including but not limited to.

  • poor attitude to environment responsibility, plastic packaging and food waste all over our streets
  • poor attitude to workers rights including zero hour contracts
  • poor attitude to food labelling and horrific portion sizes
 
Mr Bump said:
no I don't like bad sausages in a bad bun, the egg will probably ok and personally I will not purchase food at those sort of outlets due to many reasons including but not limited to.

  • poor attitude to environment responsibility, plastic packaging and food waste all over our streets
  • poor attitude to workers rights including zero hour contracts
  • poor attitude to food labelling and horrific portion sizes
Click to expand...
I could add to this at length (recommend reading Fast Food Nation), but just FYI the egg is the worst part of it, whilst you’re right about the sausage and bun.
But it’s 20 years since I ate a mcbreakfast and almost as long since I ate a mc anything.
 
tijuana taxi said:
Most people who say I wouldn't eat certain at certain establishments haven't actually ever tried it
Click to expand...
Do you have data to back up this assertion?
I’ve eaten at a fairly wide range of cafes, restaurants, street food vendors, and I can categorically state I’d only visit another McDonalds if I was literally starving and there was no other option.

It’s barely food, and the inverted snobbery doesn’t alter anything :)
 
Phil V said:
Do you have data to back up this assertion?
I’ve eaten at a fairly wide range of cafes, restaurants, street food vendors, and I can categorically state I’d only visit another McDonalds if I was literally starving and there was no other option.

It’s barely food, and the inverted snobbery doesn’t alter anything :)
Click to expand...

Nope, just anecdotal and if you had seen behind the scenes at some well known eateries you might not be so anti.
The second bit is undeniable, I fixed phones for a good few years in the west end (London) and saw some grim sights.

One very well known hotel kitchen was appalling and so much grease I just replaced the complete instrument and binned the old one.
 
The stuff on our high streets that is classed as food is just staggering and so much of it has normalised it as acceptable when it is utter crap.
 
Well I always enjoyed an Elephant leg kebab, seen what goes in saveloys and faggots, like them as well.
Fish and chips is hardly healthy or a big fry up breakfast, but very enjoyable whatever.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top