Why should it be acceptable for women to look like this?

The point is not the cost. The point is the cost actually being encouraged by the fat police. We tax smokers. They do damage to the NHS due to livestyle choices, and we tax them for it. Why is this any different?

Again smokers save the NHS money by dying earlier. You are very confused.

Not everybody who lives long is entirely dependant on the NHS. Some of us are actually healthy. And as I said it's not just about the money. And no, not everybody who has illnesses that cost money die young.

The healthy people cost the most once you get past a certain age:

"At older ages, smokers incurred higher costs. Because of differences in life expectancy, however, lifetime health expenditure was highest among healthy-living people and lowest for smokers."

http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0050029

And the short terms costs of obesity detract from funds used to cure those diseases. If we lived in some kind of Malthusian dystopia, you might have a point.

Regardless, the point, which you seem to have missed, is not total expenditure on healthcare. It is expenditure on healthcare used to increase the quality of life. Spending more to keep people healthy and alive isn't a problem. Spending less money by letting people die early in debilitating conditions (or the 'positives' of obesity you seem to be defending) is not the purpose of the NSH. Guess what; we'd save even more money by not researching cancer etc. That's clearly not the point.

Reducing obesity will lead to more money being spent on entirely necessary areas while more people have a better quality of life. That is the point.

The comments on that article mentions problems with the assumptions used in the model, etc. I won't comment further though because there's no need.

So your solution to improving people's "quality of life" (as if there is any such objective measure) is to have the government take more money from them?

As a measure to stop people dying, yes. That's the whole point of the NHS.

So "quality of life" isn't actually quality of life but simply longevity?

And being treated for illnesses. Maybe we shouldn't have healthcare and then we'd all pay fewer taxes. But nobody wants that because it's retarded.

You are arguing against a strawman here. At no point have I said that people shouldn't be treated for illnesses.

You either agree with people paying for healthcare in some way or you disagree with healthcare, because healthcare has a cost. That's just a dichotomy, so choose a side.

Yes, there is a dichotomy there but it has very little to do with the issue at hand. Disagreeing with more public health lobby approved taxation is not the same as saying healthcare shouldn't be paid for.

Okay. So you think that an inadequate health service is worth not paying as much money. I disagree. Here the debate stops because these positions are pretty much irreconcilable and basic beliefs.

? That doesn't follow at all. What I'm disagreeing with is paternalistic and authoritarian public health tax policy, not that if you have socialised medicine that it should be neglected.

It's an issue of liberty and the principle is that the government does not have the right to tell us what to consume.

The government has a right to inform, and a right to create tax incentives. If you're one of those small state fetishists, then we can't argue, because our differences in thinking are irreducibly ideological.

The point is not the cost. The point is the cost actually being encouraged by the fat police. We tax smokers. They do damage to the NHS due to livestyle choices, and we tax them for it. Why is this any different?

But is this really true though? If you take the piss out of a fat girl, every girl she knows will jump at you hissing. You take the piss out of a fat boy, everybody jumps in laughing.

we tax food already. Those who eat large quantities of food must therefore purchase more food, and pay more tax anyway.They go to stores, restaurants, even takeaways and contribute to the economy, which all pay tax.

Further taxes on foods, would be counter productive.




I still say so.

Who gave unhealthy obese women the right to justify their own failures in maintaining a decent lifestyle.

Yeah i wouldn't really hold to the argument tax is the answer to be honest.

I see no argument you can make that fat girls have it worse.