Live data from Hacker News

Weigh more, pay more: Argument for charging obese people higher flying fares

project-syndicate.org

31–40 of 67 posts

Re: Weigh more, pay more: Argument for charging obese people higher flying fares

#31
Paying by the kg, whether kg of flesh/fat or kg of luggage, wouldn't be absurd. The kg of fat might be a bit cheaper, though: you need luggage crew to haul luggage, but most haul themselves autonomously.

A reason to impose penalty on luggage weight is that it affects what people bring aboard: penalties might entice you to leave some luggage at home; they won't entice you to leave your rolls of fat on the ground.

But companies won't start selling airfares by the kg: for it to be workable, you'd need a clear pricing scheme, and that's not in their best interest.

Re: Weigh more, pay more: Argument for charging obese people higher flying fares

#32
post #9

The author dilutes and weakens his argument by bringing up obesity. Whether a 80kg person is 40% fat or 10% fat doesn't matter; the central point is that a person who weighs more, consumes more, and thus ought to pay more. I wish he stuck more to that point instead of running off on the tangent about health and the environment. Friends with whom I discuss this proposal often say that many obese people cannot help bei…

There is a lot of evidence that obesity is not hereditary/predetermined, but is a choice (or a consequence of a weak mind/bad incentives). I was in Vietnam 5 years ago. I didn't see any fat people. Look at photos/documentaries of Africa. No fat people. To take it to the extreme, there were no fat people in Auschwitz. That is not to say that it was good in any way and that people should starve, but just that it is not…

Auschwitz? Seriously?

Your comment is the worst I've read on HN in a while. I think I threw up a little in my mouth.

Re: Weigh more, pay more: Argument for charging obese people higher flying fares

#33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obesity is 100% calories in/calories out. Good thing I'm at a startup trying to help people eat healthy and in reasonable portions without feeling unduly hungry.

Sarcasm ? I mean I'm not saying that people crying about genetics and how they can't help it aren't just wining but AFAIK it matters very much what kind your diet consists of and how physically fit you are ie. carbs, insulin sensitivity and muscle mass are crucial factors, calories in/out seem waay to simplistic.

It is too simplistic - the human body has all sorts of hystereses in it, and doesn't work on a linear scale with calories. That being said, improving diet and using appropriate quantities is a fairly common solution - if people can stick to it, they'll generally be better off.

Re: Weigh more, pay more: Argument for charging obese people higher flying fares

#34
post #31

Paying by the kg, whether kg of flesh/fat or kg of luggage, wouldn't be absurd. The kg of fat might be a bit cheaper, though: you need luggage crew to haul luggage, but most haul themselves autonomously. A reason to impose penalty on luggage weight is that it affects what people bring aboard: penalties might entice you to leave some luggage at home; they won't entice you to leave your rolls of fat on the ground. But…

It's not the pricing scheme, it's the invasion of privacy that people will arc up about. Someone who is sensitive about their weight - and there are a lot of them - will be very difficult to manage in this situation.

Re: Weigh more, pay more: Argument for charging obese people higher flying fares

#35
post #9

The author dilutes and weakens his argument by bringing up obesity. Whether a 80kg person is 40% fat or 10% fat doesn't matter; the central point is that a person who weighs more, consumes more, and thus ought to pay more. I wish he stuck more to that point instead of running off on the tangent about health and the environment. Friends with whom I discuss this proposal often say that many obese people cannot help bei…

There is a lot of evidence that obesity is not hereditary/predetermined, but is a choice (or a consequence of a weak mind/bad incentives). I was in Vietnam 5 years ago. I didn't see any fat people. Look at photos/documentaries of Africa. No fat people. To take it to the extreme, there were no fat people in Auschwitz. That is not to say that it was good in any way and that people should starve, but just that it is not…

>There is a lot of evidence that obesity is not hereditary/predetermined, but is a choice (or a consequence of a weak mind/bad incentives).

There is a lot of evidence that obesity is mostly hereditary/predetermined and not a choice. That's the great thing in this area of science: Everybody proofs everything all the time. No one's wiser.

> To take it to the extreme, there were no fat people in Auschwitz. That is not to say that it was good in any way and that people should starve, but just that it is not impossible to be normal for anyone, you just have to try.

So, you state that one can be lean by being forcefully starved (Auschwitz), then state that you don't think this is a good idea and then state "but it is not impossible to be normal for anyone" - well: You didn't provide an example for "normal". This people in Auschwitz were starving. Food-related diseases (and all other diseases) were on an all-time high. People were dying all the time. This is not an example of "normal", this is an example that the human body is able to withstand many, many forms of abuse until it breaks.

You would help this discussion if you were able to provide examples of big groups of obese people (there are always outliers) which were able to get lean without starving (starving is really, really bad for your body). Thanks.

edit: I've missed the part about Vietnam/Africa before. If you didn't see any fat people in Vietnam then you probably didn't look hard enough. I was there and I've seen them. Africa: Documentaries on Africa usually focus on the really poor parts of Africa. People starve there too, so: See above. (Also: There is the case of hunger obesity where you get really obese because or starvation. Try Google, but beware of shocking results)

Re: Weigh more, pay more: Argument for charging obese people higher flying fares

#36
Measuring people's weight would make the already humiliating experience at airports even worse for many people, especially for women. Imagine the humiliation a female (over even a male) passenger would experience when she's flagged at the airport as overweight in front of her friends, family or colleagues.

This is an incredibly bad idea and it would be a PR and commercial disaster for any airline or airport that would introduce such a scheme.

Re: Weigh more, pay more: Argument for charging obese people higher flying fares

#37
post #4

I don't think 75KG is a good standard weight. I mean, what about people who are muscular? I go to the gym and nobody I know would say I am obese (I am a little overweight) but because of muscles I'm around 109KG - I was 100KG and overweight, now I'm thinner and stronger but actually heavier. So should people who are muscular be exempt? Do we do it based on height vs muscle or body fat percentage? Unless we consider t…

It's not about rewarding you for being healthy, it's about charging people for the resources (eg, jet fuel) which they consume. Whether your weight is from fat or muscles, you are costing the airline more than the 75kg person next to you.

You're right about the main thrust of the article, however a significant part of the article did argue about health issues, obesity and taxing unhealthy living, which I think weakened his argument somewhat. So as a counter to that side of the piece, I think it's ok to mention the difference between muscle/fat etc.

Re: Weigh more, pay more: Argument for charging obese people higher flying fares

#38
post #30
post #26

I can't wait for passenger rail to take off in the US. The weight of the passengers is virtually inconsequential - CSX has advertized that they can transport 1 ton of freight 436 miles on a single gallon of diesel fuel. Obviously people aren't freight, but even if it ends up being 10x that amount of passengers, that's still pennies for an increased cost if someone is overweight or obese.

I'm in the US and way overweight even by American standards, and I take the train everywhere. I'm in NYC and I can easily go to Boston, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, DC, or even Toronto via Amtrak. Certainly takes longer than a plane, but the comfort is worth it for me. If only there were trains to Europe.

Tickets are subsidised in the south, too. You can cover a lot of ground for not much money. Get up, walk around, plenty of space, power outlets at the seats, no air pressure issues, something to look at through nice big windows instead of clouds through a tiny window if you're right next to it, no security procedures... there's a lot going for the train.

Re: Weigh more, pay more: Argument for charging obese people higher flying fares

#39

The reason, generally, you are charged more for heavier luggage has got nothing to do with jet fuel consumption and everything to do with higher baggage handling fees. Since handlers don't actually have to carry obese people (that's a job for the person's legs), it makes complete sense to charge for heavier luggage rather than heavier people.

Baggage handlers are not paid by baggage weight, so that does not make much sense. Jet fuel consumption, on the other hand, is heavily impacted by airframe weight.

If you have double the items of luggage, you need double the number of handlers to move it through in the same amount of time. Excess baggage isn't all about the weight, it's a just a convenient and public-understandable thing to focus on, and gives them incentive to pack less.

Re: Weigh more, pay more: Argument for charging obese people higher flying fares

#40

Should we charge more for disabled people? Does any additional cost to a company mean that it can treat its customers differently? We must have a society where the equality of people is incontrovertible, and we make accommodations for the fact. That a thin small woman weighing 50Kg is worth the same as a muscular or fat person weighing 100kg. To ask one to pay more for a service because of what they are is unequal tr…

Well said. This is the real issue at hand here, a level beyond squabbling over simple freight charges.
Post reply on HN