d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > 24 Hour Gym Bankrupt
Prev123
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 34,418
Joined: Dec 27 2010
Gold: 13,990.01
Jun 15 2020 11:23pm
Quote (duffman316 @ Jun 16 2020 12:20am)
I support this tax on fat people


Then you will need to define "fat".

A defensive lineman who is 6'4" and 300lbs would be considered fat, however they're in better shape than the 6' 140lb kid who stays indoors and doesn't exercise. Does the bigger person get taxed more?
Does the marathon runner who is 5'6" and 115lbs have to pay extra tax because they're too skinny?

It's a fine line you run when you're introducing government control and tax over people's lifestyle choices.

Quote (ThatAlex @ Jun 16 2020 12:05am)
Japan had a "fat tax" that fined companies or local governments if they didn't meet population health goals. I don't think this would work in the US (could lead to discriminatory hiring or firing policies), but I do think the concept of involving the private sector or work more in our health is interesting, considering just how much Americans work and how work can hurt our health.

Maybe the government could incentivize companies to give time during work for exercise or installing workout equipment/coordinating discounts to local gyms.

Of course, I think universal health care would help, too.



That's a good idea. Would have to fight farm lobby, which is no easy task.


I think America needs a complete revamp in it's societal viewpoint on work. If your unions and companies fought for more holidays/vacation time, rather than adding a gym in the building as suggested, people would have more time to be healthier or make healthier choices.

A lot of American work-culture is based around working insane amounts of hours, getting little sleep, and accepting that. Instead of participating in the rat race, I think people need to become more realistic with what they want from life. Which (in my opinion) is because we don't give people enough time to do so. School is jammed down your throat all day, then you're pressured to go to college or university under the premise it will lead to a successful life, and in order to pay for said school you either A) work during your time off in your high school years which reduces free time even more B ) take out monstrous loans with predatory interest rates that you're stuck paying for 20 years or C) be lucky enough to get a scholarship OR have your parents pay for it.

I think pressuring an undeveloped 18 year old into making a life altering decision, at that age, without proper life experiences, is backwards.

Quote (Kamahl16 @ Jun 15 2020 05:37pm)
https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/15/investing/24-hour-fitness-bankruptcy/index.html

This affected me for sure since this was the gym I was a member of and saw like 10 locations close in Las Vegas. Now, this is obviously because the virus, but it got me thinking about something I remember discussing here years ago and that would be possible public benefits for maintaining good health. I didn't read much about the virus but I feel like I heard that obesity was one of the key factors in making the virus dangerous to an individual. Removing the virus from the discussion entirely I feel like I've heard that obesity and complications resulting from it put an enormous burden on our public health system. This obviously makes a ton of sense and makes me ask; "what's the solution?"

Working in the food industry I've noticed an awareness of this fact and a precedent seems to have been set on putting a value on public health regarding obesity. For example, recently in Nevada restaurants were made required to display the calorie count on items on their menu. This implies that we (meaning society) "cares" about nutrition and are making an attempt to curb obesity by creating a public awareness of what they are consuming. This seems interesting to me because calories don't tell the entire story about what's in a thing and points out a shortfall in terms of nutritional education in the nation.

As a fatty myself ultimately I have nobody to blame for being obese during my youth and 20's than myself. But I feel like if it had been a major point of emphasis during K-12 to not just restrict damaging items that I would be able to consume and indeed really only had the option to consume most times but also be educated on why those things are bad and what to try and consume instead.

There is an obvious contention between this line of thinking and corporate interest, but fuck them to be honest.

Anyways, the idea I mentioned at the top was the idea of creating a financial incentive or individuals to maintain quality health that puts them at less risk for things like COVID-19 and a number of other afflictions that create a burden on public health. For example, perhaps people could receive some sort of tax relief of financial assistance towards buying food if they somehow prove they are attempting to fight obesity. I don't know how this would work, maybe a system where you log workouts/gym visits or some shit kind of like providing a list to unemployment showing you've been looking to work or a weigh in or something.

I'm sure this isn't something viable or anything but the question of where the consciousness and action regarding public health ends is to me interesting. Should it take the leap from awareness like we're seeing with calorie information/cigarette warnings to more pro-active policy?


Yes, obesity does place a large burden on public health care as obesity puts people at a higher risk for developing negative health conditions. Them developing these conditions means more hospital visits, more medication, more surgeries, etc. Providing a financial incentive to people who are obese to lose weight doesn't work. Being in this field and studying it you will learn that people who are obese, outside of a few health conditions, CHOOSE to be obese (barring children as they mainly eat what their parents feed them). I will use a personal example of my older brother. He lived in an active household that didn't order out, cooked home-made healthy meals consisting of a balanced diet. Fruit, vegetables, meat, carbs, starches, and the odd treat. My father, when we were younger, had us do physical activity instead of chores. Skip rope for 500 skips, progressing it as we aged, stay outdoors until 5:00pm after school playing sports or being out with out friends, etc. Well my brother at age 19 left the home and he's ballooned in weight over the past 10 years up to 300lbs at 5'7".

We've provided all the incentives you can imagine. We said come home and live rent free, etc, have home cooked meals, all we ask is you do 30 minutes of activity a day. Well it briefly worked until he had saved up enough money then he'd move out again and fatten right back up. Next year, my mom told him he can come live with her (parents are split) and he did, then he got down to 220ish or so, saved up about $8,000 that he would have been paying in rent and groceries, then fucked off again and spent it all on shit. He didn't want to lose the weight, it was us, who wanted him to lose the weight.

Most obese people don't want to put in the effort, and throwing in financial incentives won't do jack shit. It's an addiction to food, or a mental health problem and unless they WANT to lose the weight, it won't happen. The incentive for them to stay healthy is already there, as your health is priority #1. I've had doctors tell my family members who smoke that they are shaving years off of their lives, I've got obese family members who struggle to walk for more than 5 minutes on a flat surface that don't see these problems. Taxing them for being fat won't encourage them, it will make them angry at the government for kicking them while they're down, and they'll resort back to food as a coping mechanism.


The best way to do it is to teach people (which we do in Canada) about healthy diets and active lifestyles, and host free programs people can join, to improve their lives. I can remember back as far as grade 4 we were learning about a balanced diet, and being encouraged to be active during physical education in school, and the benefits of a healthy body. Learning about muscles, organs, etc. during school is what made me and others choose to get into this field. I just think America has their head in the sand when it comes to lots of things and they think they're #1 in everything in the world when they're actually quite behind in a lot of things. Wealth inequality is a strong factor in this, in my opinion.
Member
Posts: 58,281
Joined: Jul 10 2006
Gold: 2,900.49
Jun 16 2020 03:53pm
Quote (sir_lance_bb @ Jun 15 2020 06:15pm)
Poor people still smoke cigarettes even though it taxed out the max.

Policies like these will just make poor people poorer and still fat fucks.

I think you just have to accept the adults are too far gone and instead focus on mending behavior in children and early intervention, similar to how also true for education, the earlier you instill good habits/discipline, the better the outcome later on.


Well, one idea is that if you expose people in their adulthood, even early adulthood (18-25), to the idea that this should be a top priority for them they may pass that on to their children if/when they have them and support businesses and whatnot that are beneficial towards those ends. Accepting we're "too far gone" doesn't seem like a good idea.

Quote (Handcuffs @ Jun 15 2020 07:27pm)
Financial incentives already exist in consumption taxes, which really are just punitive financial measures aimed at curtailing the consumption of low/non-nutritional items. It doesn't really change or address the underlying compulsion to buy/eat those products, and oftentimes people just end up pivoting to something else that's also low/non-nutritional but at a lower price-point.


How so?

Quote (GLYC123 @ Jun 15 2020 08:19pm)
Some insurances here provide you with huge discounts for staying active (logging gym entries, Fitbit step counts).

Also, sorry to hear about the gym closure. That sucks, especially if you were making good progress towards your goals.


Where is "here"?

Member
Posts: 58,281
Joined: Jul 10 2006
Gold: 2,900.49
Jun 16 2020 03:56pm
Quote
Japan had a "fat tax" that fined companies or local governments if they didn't meet population health goals. I don't think this would work in the US (could lead to discriminatory hiring or firing policies), but I do think the concept of involving the private sector or work more in our health is interesting, considering just how much Americans work and how work can hurt our health.

Maybe the government could incentivize companies to give time during work for exercise or installing workout equipment/coordinating discounts to local gyms.

Of course, I think universal health care would help, too.


That would be an interesting experiment for sure, to create an outlet in the workplace that tries to promote exercise. I've worked in the food industry pretty much since high school and it is pretty physical and whatnot so I'm not sure what it would mean for companies that don't have the same level of physical exertion.

Universal health care I'm sure would help. People not looking at things like a dietitian or going in for a checkup for "no reason" as luxuries that can't afford would be cool.


Quote
Then you will need to define "fat".

A defensive lineman who is 6'4" and 300lbs would be considered fat, however they're in better shape than the 6' 140lb kid who stays indoors and doesn't exercise. Does the bigger person get taxed more?
Does the marathon runner who is 5'6" and 115lbs have to pay extra tax because they're too skinny?

It's a fine line you run when you're introducing government control and tax over people's lifestyle choices.


I think this obviously would be dealt with by professionals who know what they are looking to accomplish through this policy. There are outliers like you're talking about, professional athletes and whatnot, but I think there's a hefty group that would benefit from this that could probably be defined within reasonable parameters.

This post was edited by Kamahl16 on Jun 16 2020 03:58pm
Member
Posts: 11,757
Joined: Dec 17 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jun 16 2020 03:58pm
Quote (Kamahl16 @ Jun 16 2020 04:53pm)
Well, one idea is that if you expose people in their adulthood, even early adulthood (18-25), to the idea that this should be a top priority for them they may pass that on to their children if/when they have them and support businesses and whatnot that are beneficial towards those ends. Accepting we're "too far gone" doesn't seem like a good idea.



How so?



Where is "here"?


Minnesota. You swipe your number at the gym, or get a total amount of steps, you get health insurance discounts. And not all health insurances here do that, but some do.
Member
Posts: 58,281
Joined: Jul 10 2006
Gold: 2,900.49
Jun 16 2020 04:03pm
Quote
I think America needs a complete revamp in it's societal viewpoint on work. If your unions and companies fought for more holidays/vacation time, rather than adding a gym in the building as suggested, people would have more time to be healthier or make healthier choices.

A lot of American work-culture is based around working insane amounts of hours, getting little sleep, and accepting that. Instead of participating in the rat race, I think people need to become more realistic with what they want from life. Which (in my opinion) is because we don't give people enough time to do so. School is jammed down your throat all day, then you're pressured to go to college or university under the premise it will lead to a successful life, and in order to pay for said school you either A) work during your time off in your high school years which reduces free time even more B ) take out monstrous loans with predatory interest rates that you're stuck paying for 20 years or C) be lucky enough to get a scholarship OR have your parents pay for it.

I think pressuring an undeveloped 18 year old into making a life altering decision, at that age, without proper life experiences, is backwards.


Well, consider in the past when individuals worked far more hours than we do now with even less in the amount of humane workplace amenities and whatnot and they didn't have the same level of obesity that we do now. I don't know if I agree that an increased workload has led to our obesity here in the states nor do I think that people would convert more time off towards physical exercise/wellness/etc. They'd probably play games or sit on their ass. Taking that last sentence; I'm not trying to take a condescending stance here. I'm as guilty as anyone, personally, but I think that any policy with as sweeping a goal as I'm discussing are likely to payoff way down the line so it's a discussion worth having with posterity in mind.

Quote (GLYC123 @ Jun 16 2020 02:58pm)
Minnesota. You swipe your number at the gym, or get a total amount of steps, you get health insurance discounts. And not all health insurances here do that, but some do.


That's cool as Hell. I'll freely admit to my own insurance of existing policy, so for all I know something like this might exist in Nevada, but for me personally I haven't had health insurance for half a decade and when I did I'm 99% sure that wasn't a part of it.

Quote
Yes, obesity does place a large burden on public health care as obesity puts people at a higher risk for developing negative health conditions. Them developing these conditions means more hospital visits, more medication, more surgeries, etc. Providing a financial incentive to people who are obese to lose weight doesn't work. Being in this field and studying it you will learn that people who are obese, outside of a few health conditions, CHOOSE to be obese (barring children as they mainly eat what their parents feed them). I will use a personal example of my older brother. He lived in an active household that didn't order out, cooked home-made healthy meals consisting of a balanced diet. Fruit, vegetables, meat, carbs, starches, and the odd treat. My father, when we were younger, had us do physical activity instead of chores. Skip rope for 500 skips, progressing it as we aged, stay outdoors until 5:00pm after school playing sports or being out with out friends, etc. Well my brother at age 19 left the home and he's ballooned in weight over the past 10 years up to 300lbs at 5'7".

We've provided all the incentives you can imagine. We said come home and live rent free, etc, have home cooked meals, all we ask is you do 30 minutes of activity a day. Well it briefly worked until he had saved up enough money then he'd move out again and fatten right back up. Next year, my mom told him he can come live with her (parents are split) and he did, then he got down to 220ish or so, saved up about $8,000 that he would have been paying in rent and groceries, then fucked off again and spent it all on shit. He didn't want to lose the weight, it was us, who wanted him to lose the weight.

Most obese people don't want to put in the effort, and throwing in financial incentives won't do jack shit. It's an addiction to food, or a mental health problem and unless they WANT to lose the weight, it won't happen. The incentive for them to stay healthy is already there, as your health is priority #1. I've had doctors tell my family members who smoke that they are shaving years off of their lives, I've got obese family members who struggle to walk for more than 5 minutes on a flat surface that don't see these problems. Taxing them for being fat won't encourage them, it will make them angry at the government for kicking them while they're down, and they'll resort back to food as a coping mechanism.


The best way to do it is to teach people (which we do in Canada) about healthy diets and active lifestyles, and host free programs people can join, to improve their lives. I can remember back as far as grade 4 we were learning about a balanced diet, and being encouraged to be active during physical education in school, and the benefits of a healthy body. Learning about muscles, organs, etc. during school is what made me and others choose to get into this field. I just think America has their head in the sand when it comes to lots of things and they think they're #1 in everything in the world when they're actually quite behind in a lot of things. Wealth inequality is a strong factor in this, in my opinion.


Regarding the bold -- how are you personally involved with this issue? I'm just curious.

I am curious as to what existing policy we have now that fails or if you think that categorically it is something you couldn't accomplish. For example, suppose we hypothetically offered people 1 million dollars a year if they met certain health standards. Would it reduce obesity significantly? I imagine it would still exist because, as you said, people choose to be obese and some people are unwilling to make adjustments to meet those standards, maybe have logistical/genetic factors making it much harder, don't value the money enough to sacrifice their lifestyle, whatever, but ultimately I think over a long time we'd see obesity become less of a problem.

Regarding the rest -- I think it would be good to not use personal anecdotal evidence to discount this thing. You admit in the closing that education would be a big benefit, which I agree with and have mentioned, and I'm also concerned more for posterity and the long-term effects of such a policy than on any short-term kinds of benefits. Talking about adults living now, many who probably wouldn't adjust unless the incentives were pretty big, aren't solely the target of this policy, it's a long-term thing and would likely be a pretty decent slog over a good amount of time.


This post was edited by Kamahl16 on Jun 16 2020 04:12pm
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev123
Add Reply New Topic New Poll