Parents of obese children should be fined
In my opinion, children obesity is a form of neglect and the parents are the ones to blame. Hence, there should be fines/reduction of government benefits to the families with obese children. In terms of carrots you could add various incentives and there should be an opportunity to reclaim lost money/benefits
Apparently, Republican senator suggested this in 2011:
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/11/taxing-obesity/
Appart from problem with enforcing this, what arguments would you have against this?
If you really think that fining parents for failing to regulate their children's food intake is okay then I suggest you move to communist China. People and children have their own decisions to make and in the process make mistakes and learn from them. I am so sick of the nanny state bullshit mentality that people so readily accept. Take responsibility for your own damn life and don't let a piece of shit like Michael Bloomberg tell you what's okay to eat and drink and the proper portion size. It's so presumptuous that people think they can regulate morality and the private lives of other people. As for the government benefits - get rid of them.
+1.
I don't even know where to begin with the OP. I can't believe how so many people just turn to the government to regulate people's lives.
It's not that simple. The obese impose a burden on the rest of society. There are many examples, but the most obvious is the higher cost of health care. Obesity costs $190 billion each year - about 10% of the total. Most health care is paid by employers, so if the expected health care bill were lower, so would insurance premiums. In turn, either corporate profits or paychecks (or both) would be higher. If the obese want to take responsibility for their own bad choices - great! - but let's not pretend they currently do. Health care is basically socialized here in the US - even without Obamacare - with medicare/medicaid and most importantly employer-provided care. The obese consume socialized services at a disproportionately high rate, and - yeah - I think they should pay more.
Do I give a shit about these people? Nope. I still have to pay for them. I'd like to bring back proper incentives in stupid people's decision making processes.
Do you have a child on welfare? If you're a female you are then required to have an IUD to prevent additional pregnancies. Are you a man with a child on welfare? You should have a net worth of zero. No car, no tv, no cell phone, no cable, no internet. That's it - you're a piece of shit and deserve nothing less.
In response to PetEng - Spoken like a true liberal with the personal insults and all. I find it very disgusting that you think that a group of nameless bureaucrats should be able to tell a man or a woman how they can live their lives.
Unfortunately, shame seems to be ineffective at this point.
EDIT: I agree we should restrict welfare recipients, not taxing fat asses. Not sure how this transitioned from fat to welfare, because there are a lot of fatties in this country and they are everywhere.
Children generally do not make their food decision, the parents do (children can twist arms, but a strong parent will withstand this). Thus, it is the parents making health decisions for their children. The Parent's choice of nutrition can have a huge impact on the child's health. The parent is taking actions that affect the life of the child. The child could die young due to health issues, or possibly face bullying in school that stunts their development. So, why can parents not be punished for taking actions that negatively affect another's life (their child in this case)?
If you were to poison your child (or anyone for that matter), you would be punished because your actions negatively affected the other person. Feeding your child fried foods and sugary snacks regularly is just a non-acute form of poison.
It is generally accepted that individuals are punished for negatively impacting the welfare of others. This situation is no different. For some reason, though, it short-circuits peoples minds because it is as parent-child relationship. This somewhat mimics spanking kids. It used to be accepted because of the thought that parents are allowed to punish their child (despite the fact that this is assault and would be punished if done to a different individual).
Theoretically, I agree with this (AREN'T I JUST SOME HUGE COMMIE!). But, the main issue I see is that the food decision made by parents is not solely on nutrition, it is also based on economics. Food that is terrible for you also happens to be incredibly cheap. Thus, this would effectively act as a tax on the poor.
This is not the solution.
^Just about to say that.
Commie bastard
I think we should tax people for being ugly too.
Fucking disgusting.
PATRIOTS FOR AN UGLY FREE AMERICA
This would be fucking awesome, but in the spirit of whatever that oldschool book was where anyone who was particularly athletic or strong or smart had to be dumbed down with weighted vests and shit like that... I feel like we'd be much quicker to tax people with genetically exceptional kids than ones who are fat or ugly or what have you. I assume this wasn't serious of course.
kurt vonnegut harrison bergeron (my favorite short story)
YES +1
The U.S. doesn't have universal health care so why do you care? Is it for justice? I also assume that cheaper unhealthy food is being bought by lower income families, and by taxing/fining them directly would force them to keep buying cheaper food.
What the fuck does this have to do with finance?
Obese people are already pretty much fined. Usually no one wants to hire a really fat person, or be around a really fat person. Which is unfortunate because they are human but a lot of people are just grossed out by it and it is hard to advance in a career because of it.
I'd actually be in favor of this. Obese children are way more likely to be obese as adults, which leads to increased healthcare/entitlement program costs and a decline in overall productivity from people with obesity related disabilities. Six year olds don't really understand the concept of healthy eating and parents that don't give a shit should be obligated to give a shit.
I think the best thing the government can do is to tax unhealthy food and provide subsidies to healthier places.
Just curious here - would you rather be:
A. a fat lard ass, ~300 lbs, or
B. moderately addicted to meth
?
Being fat is the worst thing you can do with your life
easier to lose weight than kick a meth habit imo
hate fat people
Of course a REPUBLICAN would come up with this. Government involvement is terrible!!!!*
*except for limiting abortion rights, gay rights, defense spending or anything that gives money to my state/county
I'm all for restricting what welfare recipients can do with their gov't money...
...as long as you're also ok with restricting what employees of TBTF subsidized banks can do with their's.
Deal?
Repellendus voluptatem impedit nihil voluptatem maxime repellendus minima sit. Numquam sint natus maxime aliquam at fugiat maiores. Optio pariatur et accusamus eos.
Enim hic expedita adipisci sed optio eaque. Repudiandae officiis hic ab exercitationem vel. Soluta corrupti atque ullam voluptas nostrum temporibus quo doloribus. Et distinctio sequi quas consectetur in quo qui mollitia. Soluta dolor fuga eos nisi labore veniam dolorem quasi. Tempora officiis fuga vitae recusandae eos reiciendis reiciendis unde.
Officia aut aliquam cum voluptas. Ratione sint omnis consectetur beatae molestiae nemo. Et error sed qui cupiditate non rem. Sapiente cupiditate architecto non animi sit. Perferendis et culpa non velit non. Vero qui minima qui officiis. Eaque eum ducimus voluptatem et.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Quis quisquam architecto cupiditate est asperiores eveniet. Eaque perferendis magni voluptatem laboriosam quisquam.
Ea aut rem id libero vero aut eius. Enim odit voluptas dolor labore voluptates. Sequi illo cupiditate accusantium inventore ut expedita. Recusandae sed sed provident in voluptatem velit est.
Delectus modi vel voluptas adipisci ipsum sequi. Delectus magni dolorem est nemo voluptate ipsa mollitia. Doloribus sequi perferendis molestias in qui quam iste. Ipsam libero a ipsa.
Minima ab a vel facilis molestias aut. Distinctio libero sequi numquam. Et rerum officia fuga est unde sunt id sed.