Jump to content


Should fat people pay more tax?

Recommended Posts

I suspect he means relative activity levels. Disregarding extremes at the moment (i.e anorexcs) I've noticed this just on casual observations. If I compare myself to people who are overweight, my general activity is higher - not counting the exercise I do as well, just the small things like taking the stairs, and fidgeting when sitting...

 

i exercise more than my daughter, and usually eat the same - although i do occasionally eat larger portions.

i'm twice her age and twice her size.

so why am i twice her size do you think? could it be age,food choices or the fact that i don't give a crap what the media says about how you look.

i'm fitter and eat healthier than a number of my peers - who all strut around showing off a six pack in D&G sunglasses and Armani suits.

so in my observations it's all about image.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another sweeping generalisation. So fat people dont use the stairs, fidget or do normal every day activities? Of course your right, I personally get carried around on a sedan chair by 4 very fit but skinny people......

Another person who reads between the lines and ignores what is written on the actual line itself..

Take two people who appear to eat the same and if one is thinner than the other and you will find that the skinnier person uses more calories through total daily activity. Most of which activity is invisible to the casual observer.

Fat people eat more than they need to maintain weight. Thinking otherwise is simply delusional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i exercise more than my daughter, and usually eat the same - although i do occasionally eat larger portions.

i'm twice her age and twice her size.

So you have measured the total calories burned by you and your daughter each day and eat exactly the same amount of food. Oh sorry you don't do you, you actually eat bigger portions some of the time. Well over time that adds up considerably.

so why am i twice her size do you think? could it be age,food choices or the fact that i don't give a crap what the media says about how you look.
What the media says has no actual effect of your waistline. Unless you change something as a result. And you probably eat more relative to the total amount of calories burnt if you have more excess weight than her. You simply think that doesn't happen.

 

i'm fitter and eat healthier than a number of my peers - who all strut around showing off a six pack in D&G sunglasses and Armani suits.

so in my observations it's all about image.

I'd say your views seem to be more about your own false perceptions and personal insecurities. And how do you show off a six pack whilst wearing an Armani suit.

Besides having a six pack is not a measure of fitness, which is very, very sport/activity specific. And how exactly have you measured this 'fact'?

 

Plus there's the ability/mental aspect to excercise. I've did some martial arts after 5 years away and at a low period of general excercise and yet I appeared much fitter than those half my age and in regular training - why? Simple, I was much better technically at this than they were and was more relaxed about how I did things, so got less tired and out of breath.

I've seen plenty of very fit people from other activities struggle [fitness wise] with new excercises, simply as they weren't muscle/memory trained at that specific skill and tried too hard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i don't need to get defensive. for alli know you could weigh 20 stone and look vanessa feltz.but you always make sweeping statemnets that you cannot support with fact.

 

"Those who are skinnier are more active/move quicker. "

 

so you deny making the above statement.

 

you make any comment or inuendo you like m8, but you made the statement not me.

that statement is total crap. hence my comments on skinny models.

they don't all move around quicker and they are skinny.

now do you get the basic point i'm making.

your argument is flawed and total crap.

Actually you simply cannot read. It was not a sweeping statement if you actually read the whole post. Maybe it's because you can't be bothered to finish things is why you weigh more than your daughter!:hihi:

 

I was not talking about models who have a cigarette for breafast and some coke for tea. It's you who seems to be obsessed with them and keep bringing them into the argument. Which has nothing at all to do with what I was saying.

I never denied making the above statement, but you have taken it out of context and you will note it does not say all people who are skinny are more active. I was specifically talking about comparing similar people, who ate similar amounts yet had dissimilar weights. The reason for the discrepancy is the different amounts of [base] activity/exercise they do relative to each other. And fidgeting, more nervous movements and rushing around uses a lot more calories than a more slothful, less active person uses.

Some people walk up stairs, some run up, maybe a couple of steps at a time.

One little difference like that on it's own, could explain why you weigh more than your daughter.

 

If you cannot be bothered to read posts properly, I won't bother responding to your idiotic posts. You obviously have a thing about people who look good

or care about their appearence. Why even worry about it, unless it something that actually bothers you more than you like to admit. I don't care what you look like, it's your choice. If you want to be fat, be fat, it you want to have a sixpack put some time in down the gym, but don't complain because some people do care about how they look. You simply come across as someone who is insecure and feels threatened by slim and healthy people. :loopy: Which you displace by attacking them, the media or brands of clothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Plus, you are completely ignoring the point I made about base excercise levels. Those who are skinnier are more active/move quicker. Those who are overweight tend to do less and do it slowly when they do do anything. And even figeting helps to lose weight. This has an effect on sedentary people too, more so if anything"

 

i'm sorry point me to the comparison with any person or persons.

 

i am sending a copy of your last post to the medical science groups

i think you've cracked it with the stair running, thats it for me i'm gonna run up all the stairs i get too.

 

 

i have a problem with people who think they're "king of the circle". you have a set ideology of what is normal to you that's your circle- based on your lifestyle. anyone doesn't conform falls outside your circle, and then obviously must be abnormal.

 

being skinny or fat is not JUST a question of calories and exercise - try looking at a medical book instead of generalising.

 

being fit doesn't mean you have to be thin.

 

now those two comments are true and apparently are not what you are stating hence my "attack" on your stupidity. perhaps s you should learn to enter a correct and valid statement without expecting us to understand what you mean.

 

i never stated any facts - but as i continue to "better" them at a selected number of sporting events i class that as being better and fitter.

or isn't that a method of measuring physical ability?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Plus, you are completely ignoring the point I made about base excercise levels. Those who are skinnier are more active/move quicker. Those who are overweight tend to do less and do it slowly when they do do anything. And even figeting helps to lose weight. This has an effect on sedentary people too, more so if anything"

 

i'm sorry point me to the comparison with any person or persons.

The Mayo clinic in the US does a lot of work in this area

"A recently published study he led showed that thin people are on their feet an average of 152 more minutes a day than couch potatoes."

More info on NEAT here

http://mayoresearch.mayo.edu/mayo/research/levine_lab/about.cfm

How they measured the info here

http://mayoresearch.mayo.edu/mayo/research/levine_lab/neat_things.cfm

This research has been acknowledged in the Lancet BTW, so pretty credible too.

An easy digest of the research is here.

http://www.collisiondetection.net/mt/archives/001107.html

 

i am sending a copy of your last post to the medical science groups

i think you've cracked it with the stair running, thats it for me i'm gonna run up all the stairs i get too.

I'm they will be fascinated by your gibberish. As for laughing at walking up stairs, there's a big poster advertising campaign at the moment regarding using stairs and losing weight.

More info here

http://www.obesityresearch.org/cgi/content/abstract/14/12/2210

 

 

i have a problem with people who think they're "king of the circle". you have a set ideology of what is normal to you that's your circle- based on your lifestyle. anyone doesn't conform falls outside your circle, and then obviously must be abnormal.
The fact that you have a problem with different people, doesn't mean I do. You assume a lot and know very little it seems.

 

 

being skinny or fat is not JUST a question of calories and exercise - try looking at a medical book instead of generalising.
Actually reasearch has shown that that is exactly the case.

 

 

being fit doesn't mean you have to be thin.
Never said it did, but a fatter person will struggle to get as fit as quicly as a leaner person and a leaner person will need less effort to move their lesser bulk and is therefore more efficient. Try cycling uphill or running a 200m event with an extra sone or two of fat and you'll look pretty silly compared to those who have lower fat levels.

 

 

now those two comments are true and apparently are not what you are stating hence my "attack" on your stupidity. perhaps s you should learn to enter a correct and valid statement without expecting us to understand what you mean.
Your facts aren't actually true and the paragraph of your sentence is poorly and lazilywritten Enlish. Maybe that's how you think, so when something is written correctly you get all confused.

 

 

i never stated any facts - but as i continue to "better" them at a selected number of sporting events i class that as being better and fitter.

or isn't that a method of measuring physical ability?

Confusing skill with fitness is what you seem to be doing. If you want to measure actual fitness, you need to do a VO2 Max test. Also if someone smokes that will impair fitness even if they are less fat.

Your problem with scientific methodology and lack of understanding, is that you do not realise that you should have only have one variable, when doing comparisons. You compare things with 10s of variables which render any conclusions fatuous and nonsensical and certainly non scientific.

 

You are too lazy to even use the shift key to capitalize your writing when needed, which illustrates your slothful nature, quite nicely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Actually reasearch has shown that that is exactly the case"

 

so we can discount illness i assume.

 

"The fact that you have a problem with different people, doesn't mean I do. You assume a lot and know very little it seems"

but i don't ridicule or belittle people who are different,like you've been trying.

unfortunately i do know quite a bit.

 

"You are too lazy to even use the shift key to capitalize your writing when needed, which illustrates your slothful nature, quite nicely."

 

nothing to do with laziness, i don't see the need especially when conversing with somoeone like you.i think the people on the forum who do know can vouch for me not being slothful.

 

"Confusing skill with fitness is what you seem to be doing."

how do you know?

so if i can run 10k quicker than my colleagues does that make me a better runner or a fitter runner.or is being fitter making me better.

 

so we agree being skinny doesn't make you healthier. at least thats something

 

 

"You compare things with 10s of variables which render any conclusions fatuous and nonsensical and certainly non scientific"

so making sweeping statements that thin people are more active than fatter isn't including 10's of variables or being fatuous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Actually reasearch has shown that that is exactly the case"

 

so we can discount illness i assume.

So bringing in another variable, no-one else is talking anbout, i.e. ill people or anorexics or those who starve themselves bar you.

We are talking about normal heathy people.

 

"The fact that you have a problem with different people, doesn't mean I do. You assume a lot and know very little it seems"

but i don't ridicule or belittle people who are different,like you've been trying.

unfortunately i do know quite a bit.

I find that very hard to believe as you have problems reading more than a few consecutive words.

 

"You are too lazy to even use the shift key to capitalize your writing when needed, which illustrates your slothful nature, quite nicely."

 

nothing to do with laziness, i don't see the need especially when conversing with somoeone like you.i think the people on the forum who do know can vouch for me not being slothful.

So you are patronizing and stupid. What a total and complete bigot you appear to be. You know nothing about me, assume a lot of innaccurate nonsense, fail to read posts all the way through and you have this really condescending attitude as if you are above others. You have posted poorly written, scientifically pathetic posts, ignore valid well researched references and yet you sneer and look down at others.

 

 

"Confusing skill with fitness is what you seem to be doing."

how do you know?

so if i can run 10k quicker than my colleagues does that make me a better runner or a fitter runner.or is being fitter making me better.

You can probably run 10k faster than me, I couldn't even run half that distance, yet I'm regarded as being very fit [at other sports]. Though, I can probably do other things better/faster than you, like a 100m as I'm a sprinter. Maybe your colleagues would beat you there too, A VO2 max test is how you measure fitness, not how good you are at a particular sport, though if you have to do by running or cyling, if you already do those activities then you have a big advantage over those that don't.

Beating someone at one activity means you are better then them at that activity, not you are simply fitter per se. Now that is generalizing.

 

so we agree being skinny doesn't make you healthier. at least thats something
That's not what I said. Go and learn to read

 

 

"You compare things with 10s of variables which render any conclusions fatuous and nonsensical and certainly non scientific"

so making sweeping statements that thin people are more active than fatter isn't including 10's of variables or being fatuous.

How stupid are you? I have already pointed out that I did not make sweeping statements, I made qualified comments, but you probably did bother to read the whole paragraph.

Go and look at the evidence I linked above, which you so conveniently ignored.

 

I refuse to bother reasoning anymore with an illiterate, bigoted troll, so I shall apply a kill switch to anything you post. regarding your deluded reasons as to why you are not slim.

You eat more than you need to, you put on weight, it's no more complex than that. Basic physics/chemistry.

The only 'complexity' is the stupidity of foolish humans who delude themselves as to how much activity/food they actually do/consume.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the op didn't say OBESE he said FAT.

blatant trolling.

i personally don't think that "cosmetic" surgery on the nhs for things such as this should be allowed, but then again i dont think the nhs is the place for breast implants or gender reassignment issues.

 

How the hell is that trolling? Do you have some kind of paranoia problem, or perhaps you don't know what the term means?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a tax on stupidity? It causes accidents, bad parenting (the two might be linked ...), unhealthy lifestyles, irritation to others, horrible decorating mistakes ... the cost to society is immense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How about a tax on stupidity? It causes accidents, bad parenting (the two might be linked ...), unhealthy lifestyles, irritation to others, horrible decorating mistakes ... the cost to society is immense.

 

 

That would be hard to quantify though because most of the tax inspectors assessing the levels of stupidity would be stupid themselves :hihi:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More tax is a bit harsh but people who are overweight should pay more for airline tickets. Why do I have to pay the same price as the guy next to me who is making my flight uncomfortable with his flab hanging over the arm of my seat and who weighs more than me and my luggage put together when I am only allowed 20kgs of luggage! There was a documentary on TV recently that I missed which was apparently claiming fat people increase the risks on aeroplanes because of the weight distribution and the way the weight limits are calculated - basically, if you have a load of 30 stoners on your flight then you're at risk. Fine, you can have the heart disease and all the other problems associated with being overweight but why should I suffer when I travel by air!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.