I think the obese should pay for their externalities directly. Also, if the best treatment for something is “lose weight” then that should be tried first and no other treatments given until the weight is lost.
80% of people with Type II diabetes who are also overweight or obese would be asymptomatic if they lost weight. Why spend public money if there exists a free treatment? Save the public resources for right-weight type IIs and type Is.
Ahh yes, the old “just lose weight” argument, likely spoken by someone who is not and has never been overweight or obese.
Speaking as someone who has lost over a 170lbs…it ain’t eas. It is the hardest damn thing I have ever done and your body fights you every step of the way…forever. It never ends—for the rest of your life your body is constantly fighting you to get back up to the weight you were.
Also, your concept of preventing all other treatments until someone loses weight is absolutely barbaric.
That’s why you tax soft drinks instead of taxing weight directly. It may be difficult to lose weight but it isn’t particularly difficult to cut out the most extremely unhealthy foods.
I’d be ok with that, but I don’t think it’s all that simple to cut out unhealthy foods. One, most healthy foods are pretty expensive and a lot of unhealthy foods are not. It can be difficult for people on a tight budget to eat healthy.
You also need to consider that a sugar tax can hit lower income people a bit harder.
I didn’t falsely accuse you of anything. I said “likely”.
If you were obese and now are not, I applaud you. But I also know it wasn’t easy for you to make that change. I used the word “likely”, because it felt to me like you communicated in a dismissive and nonchalant manner, like someone who hasn’t gone through the difficulties necessary to do it.
80% of people with Type II diabetes who are also overweight or obese would be asymptomatic if they lost weight. Why spend public money if there exists a free treatment? Save the public resources for right-weight type IIs and type Is.