I have no problems with a fat tax...but, if we tax people based on their weight, why not add exhorbitant taxes to alcohol and cigarette purchases (above and beyond the already obscene state and federal taxes imposed on those items)? The choice to abuse any item comes from the individual so why not place taxes on any harmful item or lifestyle?

Oh dear, here we go again. Let's tax anorexics, smokers, people who work in hazadrous industries, climbers, bungee jumpers, sky-divers, people who cause a distraction by streaking, old ladies who knit (God only knows what damage they can do to themselves with their kneedles). The same is true of crocheters, petit-pointers, joggers (their arthritis must cost the state a fortune) silly people who will do tai chi by the side of the road and cause fatal accidents and mostly twits who come up with stupid ideas for taxation which give some of us a corona.................

Here we go again, because some people free ride off the rest of us by leading unhealthy lifestyles and then expecting the rest of us to subsidies their health care costs. Why should I have to pay the same amount into the employee health insurance plan as people who lead unhealthy lifestyles? The same goes with medicaid and other entitlements. One way to even this out is to make people pay for the true economic costs of their consumption. Unfortunately you can't make the taxes to high or it will create a black market and a situation similar to the war on drugs or prohibition.

yeah, maybe we should tax bungee jumpers and old ladies who knit. they waste all of our tax dollars. maybe we could make old ladies register for a knitting licence acquired by paying a fee and being submitted to a background check.---I am talking about an obesity epimdemic that is partially supported by the US government with citizen's tax money.

Liposuction is a Voluntary "fat tax"... (?)I know a formerly obese couple that are overtly singing the praises of stomach-shrinking surgery (not liposuction). They feel full and content when they eat "enough". They are normal weight now.This is simply true and I have no bias regarding fat.

especially on aircraft where anyone who's shared a seat with a super-0bese person (i mean the 1/2 a seal you have left...) it seems a bit odd.... especially when they tell me my carry-on bag can only be a certainl weight... the weight of my neighbor's big toe. Fair tax and charges are reasonable. Excessive weight is as dangerous as other chronic health problems... why should it be select? Smoking, uber-fat, alcoholism, heroin-addiction, american-soldier-in-iraq,... all involve voluntary life-span reductions.

This idea is inane. If NOTHING ELSE how do you propose that we go about determining a person's weight and assessing a tax? Should people be required to weigh-in (literally) once a year? Sounds like the kind of society I'd like to live in, how about you?

Hell, as long as we're at it, I have a few other proposals:

a. Taxing joggers and bicyclists because they get in the way of my car, slow down traffic, and lead to societal inefficiencies.

b. Taxing healthy people because they have a longer expected life span than unhealthy people. Thus, we can expect that they will use up a disproportionate amount of public benefits such as roads or social security and medicare benefits.

c. Taxing people who spell incorrectly or use the wrong "to" as it leads to confusion, thus higher transaction costs and, ultimately, less efficiency.

d. Taxing people with higher stress levels because they can't stop obsessing over other peoples' weight and the disproportionate burden they have to bear thus are more likely to suffer health problems.

Voted against. - mjdon67

Good idea in that obsesity is a serious health issue and the cost to the taxpayer is enormous. Bad solution, instead why not something much simplier like taxing food that is bad for you, or making it more difficult or expensive to advertise food that is unhealthy.

Or, get rid of soda machines in schools. Etc. there are much better ways rather than having monthly or yearly weigh-ins.

I am completely against taxing people according to their weight.A lot of illnesses have some (indirect) voluntary component, (e.g. car injuries could be avoided, if you did not use the car), yet notbody proposes to tax car drivers if they get injured (and I don't think they should be).The point is that it is easy to discriminate against overweight and obese people because there is social stigma against them.A lot of overweight people would like to be thin, but they don't manage. Loosing weight is a complex issue:1. information about calories in the food is often absent; 2. nutritional lables are often difficult to read, ever seen "this food has 79 calories each serving size, 1 serving size is 37 grams, content of the package varies, total packege weight 2lb 7oz?3. Food advertizement often tries to trigger emotions, rather than just selling the product; when emotions are triggered rational deliberation is more difficult.

While I agree that "weighing in" to determine your tax or health insurance rate may not be the solution, perhaps giving incentives to the healthy could be an option? Insurance is already lower for non-smokers and safe drivers, would it be applicable to the healthy? Just like laws forcing people to recycle didn't work, incentives for recycling have, perhaps the same would be true for healthy behaviors.

Why is Tax the solution? If it's a problem, the private sector can easily take care of this problem. If they take up more health care services, some health care company can make their rates more competitive by including an optional weight test to see if they qualify for the "healthy weight" discount. If you think you are subsidizing them in some other way, why not suggest that the appropriate private sector company take advantage of the difference to give a better price to people who aren't fat? By making it a tax, you are saying that you thing the government can somehow more effeciently "equalize" this problem than the free market could which I think is a little foolish.

I disagree on two grounds.

One: you say they sould be punished for consuming more things, like water and oxygen. How does this affect anyone besides the people they are trapped with in a mine shaft or something?

Two: it doesn't go far enough. People will always be fat as long as there is too much food. Spray agent orange on crops worldwide and I'll agree.

I simply wish to know how we will determine who is "fat". And I want to know what the criteria will be once we get everyone to an agreed upon level. If the heaviest person alive is 220 lbs. will they then be taxed for their excessive use of our resouces?

What height to weight ratio will be used? Will football players be exempt? Will people who meet your goals receive a rebate?

This is a pretty stupid idea. If you're going to institute something to prevent obesity, at least make it beneficial to those it targets.

I think a better idea is instituting mandatory excercise programs for people whose body fat/lean muscle ratio is significantly above (say 10% above) the reccomended level for their age/sex/height, etc. At least this way, they would start to shed their unwanted pounds.

Or maybe curtailing all the advertising of cheap, shitty food ("I'm LOVIN' it!") we do in this country might help?

I don't know if it's true in other places, but foods dubbed "healthy" aren't taxed where I live. If that's not a tax on unhealthy lifestyles, I don't know what is.

The obesity problem today stems from the food pyramid of 1992 which suggests 6-12 servings of pasta and bread (which is correct) but does not distinguish between white bread, pasta, and rice and the unprocessed brown versions of these foods. Also, the low fat concept has proven to be only half effective since unsaturated fats (which contain good cholesterol) are needed by our bodies. So, currently no American has any idea what is healthy any more. It's all completely fubared. So this idea is attacking the problem at a totally wrong angle. It would seem totally unfair for the government to punish those who are now obese due to a screwed up food pyramid backed by the government.

I think fat taxes will soon be introduced. It's just a matter of time. Obese people are a true burden on health care.

It would be much better to put a high tax on refined sugar because that's whats making people 'fat'and they put it in just about everything you eat.The sugar tax revenue could go towards healthy eating education programs.

This substance is almost as addictive as cigarettes or booze; if you doubt this try not eating anything that has sugar in it for one day, if you regularly eat it you will find this extremely difficult if not impossible to do.If you put it in your coffee or tea you've got no chance of giving it up.

A smart lawyer could argue that their obese client was addicted to refined sugar and is therfore not responsible for their condition so exempt from the 'fat tax'. If the client was then forced to pay this tax they could sue the sugar company or the food company which is selling these addictive products

A big part of the problem is that so-called "unhealthy" foods are often cheaper and/or tastier than "healthy" food. Everybody loves real butter for the taste, but it's loaded with "bad" cholesterol. We all like fresh eggs, but the yolk (the tasty part) is unhealthy (again, "bad" cholesterol). All those "bad" snack crunchies are loaded with salt and "bad" fats; wouldn't it make more sense to tax the food by the amount of fat content? Say, a 20% tax on meat with a 20% fat content, 5% tax on food with a 5% fat content, and so forth? Add another tax for sugar content, and another for salt, and yet more for "artificial preservatives..."You could probably collect (almost) as much in revenue as it would cost to enforce this. But that isn't the point, is it? Isn't this just a means to punish fat people for breathing?

I suspect the person who wrote this was doing it in jest (partly). It's quite a funny thought though it couldn't and shouldn't happen. I like the idea of stigmatizing the behavior that leads to obesity. There is still a certain stigma to being morbidly obese. In a lot of those cases it represents a person's lack of self control and pure hedonistic behavior, that's just pathetic. It other cases it is a real physical/mental/emotional problem that is out of the person's control. Because of those people, it wouldn't be fair to have a fat tax.

If we were to tax fat people we should tax smokers, people with cancer, heart disease, diabetes, autism, depression, rape victims..... etc., all of whom put a drain on society and cost tax payers money.

The idea that obesity puts a strain on the health care system has some logic to it, but you solution is pretty stupid.

People need their own reasons for living either healty or indulgent lifestyles and the important thing is their freedom to do so. The strain on the health system is a product of administration and infrasturcture. In America, our health care system is crap. That's not to say that the medicine, care, and treatment is crap, just the billing and insurnance and health coverage costs.

Let's tax people for suicide while we're at it. If your bill goes through, we'll likely see a helluva lot of overlaps between the two.

Dude, I am 33, 5'7" and weigh 225 pounds. I am considered morbidly obese (whatever). Anyway, I work hard, I make a very good income, I pay all of my medical bills that my medical insurance I pay a monthly premium for doesn't, I don't breathe heavy using more oxygen, I require no government assistance, I am not a burden upon anyone, ever.

So, because I am overweight I should pay a tax for that? And Why? For me, me specifically, why would you say I need to pay a fat tax? What are the grounds? Obviously not the grounds you stated because they do not apply to me.

Message me direct and give me an answer, I really really do want to know.

Take it out of the public sector and put it in the private sector. Let the cost of a product correlate directly to the use of resources. Have the price of airline tickerts directly correlate to the weight of the passenger. Clothing stores should offer a discount to people weighing below average for thri gender.

See my 2004 post. . .

Then fuck you all!!!!

Are we to tax the anorexics for being too thin? They also require more health care services. Though it seems we only learn of their condition after the die. . . . At which point we immortalize them ad nauseum...

To the point. . .How much is too much and who gets to decide?

If you can't tell me that then the discussion is pointless.

The Income Tax has only been in this country (at the Federal level) since 1913. Which begs the question: how did we exist for 136 years prior till then? Short answer: tariffs!

To me, ANY form of taxation is insidious (sp?) and out-right EVIL. After all, it is an entity (the government) taking something (stealing) from another (citizen[s], business[es]), etc. If taxation is a necessary EVIL, why not limit it to being as small as possible?!? If we're the most wealthy nation on the planet, everyone on the globe will want to market their products here - regardless of the tariffs. Ironically, it will be the citizen that would pay for the tariff difference anyway, which might get American citizens a little more keen on trying to buy domestic products, thus providing more revenue for everyone here at home directly and indirectly.

Further, the federal budget should be trimmed to ONLY include those things which provide for the common defense and direct-benefits to the economy: the armed forces and the Treasury, Mint, and Bureaur of Ingraving, etc. Any and all other expenses are NOT legitimate Constitutional FEDERAL budgetary items; these would include education, FDA, and almost all other aspects of the government as we understand it today. Oh, by the way, ANY form of entitlements ARE NOT CONSTITUTIONAL; i.e., welfare, social security, SSI, medicare, medicaid, any and all government salaries, etc.

Anyway, just some ideas.

Any and all persons thinking that the federal government should raise taxes can pay my tax bill, being that they think that any and all tax increases are affordable they shouldn't have any problem paying for them! This would include the likes of Nancy Pelosi, Teddy Drunkennedy, Dick Durbin, Patrick Leahy, John Edwards, John Kerry, Joseph Stalin, Mao, Adolph Hitler, etc... all peas of the same pod! Liberal is just a gentler word for the REAL definition of his/her real agenda: communist/socialist! And since when has communism/socialism been the archtype for OUR civilization? I thought that communism and socialism were considered the bane of existence. Oh, yes, that was until a brave Senator from Wisconsin starting outing all of 'em in the government and in other highly influential offices throughout our society. And once the demogoguery started, the liberals haven't been able to keep their mouths shut since, claiming anything that stands in their way "McCarthyism!" People forget they he actually DID cause communists and socialists to be outed and rooted out of good society for a reason: their unfavorable thoughts. So, communists and socialists just repackaged their ideology and called it Liberalism. Oh, how cute! Group hug, anyone?!?

The logic that raising income taxes STAGNATES the economy... it doesn't perpetuate it's growth!!!! And, indirectly, raising taxes on the wealthiest of a society is ACTUALLY raising the taxes on the middle class. Why, you ask? Because it's the wealthy that owns all the businesses that the middle class pays for their products and/or services. Businesses will just raise the rates accordingly and pass the costs on to the consumers; also known as the middle class, being that the poor are generally not buying as much as the middle class.

Generally speaking, the poor will always be with us (it seems I've read that somewhere before [head-scratch]), so speaking anything to try and eliminate the poor only means one thing in the long run: a greater middle class tax burden! To which I will reiterate, anyone wishing for taxes to be raised on ANY group of our society, in short, I'll just agree, with the caveat that any and all that do agree can pay my tax burden. Until then, all you liberals... SHUT UP!!!!! Put YOUR money where your mouth is and give more than the government currently thinks you should since you like taxes so much!!!!