More petty Britain- Westminster Council, no benefits for unfit fat people?

[mongrel]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...-benefits-cuts

Guardian
Obese and other unhealthy people could be monitored to check whether they are taking exercise and have their benefits cut if they fail to do so under proposals published on Thursday by a Conservative-run council and a local government thinktank.

So in Central London, the state is going to see who is chubby or looking a bit peeky, force them into the gyms, make sure they do by spying on them and and send in the bailiffs for the rent or tax arrears they could face if they fail to comply.

Is this reasonable? Are we not supposed to be living in a free country. How much will they spend snooping on chubby people?

Eric Pickles , the local government Minister must be told . Should we set targets for him to lose weight before he claims his salary?

[Basil II the B.S]

What kind of benefits are we talking about?
Do fat people get some kind of health benefits at the expense of taxpayers for being fat?

They have the right to be fat, but I wouldn't want to pay for their medical bills.

[mongrel]

What kind of benefits are we talking about?
Do fat people get some kind of health benefits at the expense of taxpayers for being fat?

They have the right to be fat, but I wouldn't want to pay for their medical bills.

We have free health care or all, fat and skinny.

Reduced council tax bills and rents for those on Social security, pensioners and those on low wages.

i spend quite alot of time snooping on chubsters. unfortunately if they are poor and a bit lazy, they will consume cheap easy food such as doner kebabs and food from Iceland (the supermarket). In fact, if you go to frozen food markets, you'll often see fatties in leggings (at their max capacity) who will not have any reusable bags with them. This food will make them fatter.

Then when they've stocked up on fags, Birdseye Waffles and Iceland value chicken drumsticks, they'll be carring 8 plastic bags (which they wont reuse) to the bustop even though they live round the corner cos they've probably got free bus passes.

Chubbies can be quite energetic, you know.

This one's for Eric Pickles.

[Garbarsardar]

I think that the question here is what form the general principle of the social safety net takes. I explain:

Does the existence of a safety net (benefits, for example) implies that collaboration is necessary?

This is not true for categories of beneficiaries, as schizophrenic patients and autistic persons where their collaboration is waived as a pre-requisite, on grounds of absence of proper cognitive function.

I do not think that these is the case for obese people.

That said, the implementation of said scheme will border on the ridiculous, and absence of a cohesive plan to tackle the multitude of factors responsible for obesity will show it as partial and, quite frankly, hypocritical.

[Dr Zoidberg]

They have the right to be fat, but I wouldn't want to pay for their medical bills.

This. As someone who has struggled with weight loss and gain over the years, I can confidently say that for majority of people, being overweight or obese is a choice; or rather, a lack of will & effort to live healthily.

While I am fully supportive of universal healthcare, I strongly believe there should be some measures in place when it comes to treating diseases or illnesses that arise from personal choices, such as smoking or obesity.

There is enough information and research out there demonstrating that these conditions are bad for your health. People can access it through the web, public health centers, schools, NGOs, etc. Ignorance that being fat is bad for you is not an excuse.

If you front up to hospital with some obesity-related illness, and you're obese through bad lifestyle choices, I believe you should be at least partly responsible for the payment of any treatment you require.

Universal healthcare is there so everybody can receive healthcare when they need it. But it shouldn't be a free pass for people who make themselves ill through poor lifestyle choices.

As for the ways in which the council plans to try and enforce its measures, I agree with Garb that it seems ill-conceived and ridiculous when it comes to implementing them.

[Basil II the B.S]

This. As someone who has struggled with weight loss and gain over the years, I can confidently say that for majority of people, being overweight or obese is a choice; or rather, a lack of will & effort to live healthily.

While I am fully supportive of universal healthcare, I strongly believe there should be some measures in place when it comes to treating diseases or illnesses that arise from personal choices, such as smoking or obesity.

There is enough information and research out there demonstrating that these conditions are bad for your health. People can access it through the web, public health centers, schools, NGOs, etc. Ignorance that being fat is bad for you is not an excuse.

If you front up to hospital with some obesity-related illness, and you're obese through bad lifestyle choices, I believe you should be at least partly responsible for the payment of any treatment you require.

Universal healthcare is there so everybody can receive healthcare when they need it. But it shouldn't be a free pass for people who make themselves ill through poor lifestyle choices.

Exactly my point, I should have probably explained myself better.

[mongrel]

This. As someone who has struggled with weight loss and gain over the years, I can confidently say that for majority of people, being overweight or obese is a choice; or rather, a lack of will & effort to live healthily.

While I am fully supportive of universal healthcare, I strongly believe there should be some measures in place when it comes to treating diseases or illnesses that arise from personal choices, such as smoking or obesity.

There is enough information and research out there demonstrating that these conditions are bad for your health. People can access it through the web, public health centers, schools, NGOs, etc. Ignorance that being fat is bad for you is not an excuse.

If you front up to hospital with some obesity-related illness, and you're obese through bad lifestyle choices, I believe you should be at least partly responsible for the payment of any treatment you require.

Universal healthcare is there so everybody can receive healthcare when they need it. But it shouldn't be a free pass for people who make themselves ill through poor lifestyle choices.

As for the ways in which the council plans to try and enforce its measures, I agree with Garb that it seems ill-conceived and ridiculous when it comes to implementing them.

Yes.

I think if this was a genuine effort to improve health outcomes, we would be looking at, say health education, using planning laws to limit the number of fast food outlets and so on. Removing benefits and credits for those on low wages or low fixed incomes does nothing for obese people on better wages or income. This policy gives the impression that this is really a cost-cutting exercise, and once again the poor are being specifically targeted. Coupled with a Blair -like intrusion into peoples lives, which, in my view is an antithesis of personal freedom, I am wondering what the hell has happened to Conservative party of late.

[Menelik_I]

Yes.

I think if this was a genuine effort to improve health outcomes, we would be looking at, say health education, using planning laws to limit the number of fast food outlets and so on.

It is interesting that you complain about "How this is supposed to be a free country" while at the same time proposing "anti-Free" solutions (for lack of a better word). What do you want exactly ?

If there is going to be a Universal Healthcare system then those who eat themselves into illness should pay for it out of pocket to make up the difference, and if you are fat and on benefits then there is something with you too.

But between this and proposals to tax fat and sugar, the Politics of Chubby are set to grow thicker in Europe for the next few Years.

[mongrel]

It is interesting that you complain about "How this is supposed to be a free country" while at the same time proposing "anti-Free" solutions (for lack of a better word). What do you want exactly ?

If there is going to be a Universal Healthcare system then those who eat themselves into illness should pay for it out of pocket to make up the difference, and if you are fat and on benefits then there is something with you too.

But between this and proposals to tax fat and sugar, the Politics of Chubby are set to grow thicker in Europe for the next few Years.

People already pay for the NHS through taxation. The system works. Maintenance of the NHS is part of the Conservative manifesto commitment, not mine ( why are you under the impression that I write Tory policy?) so I am not sure why you think this is up for debate. If people advocate a privatized system they should also propose an equivalent cut in taxes.

One can also be fat and perfectly healthy. Eric Pickles, for example . One can also be ill and not be obese. cancer sufferers for instance. And what about the elderly. Are we seriously expecting them to pump iron.

I object to the state spending money monitoring the poor and middling income sick and the fat, just because they don't earn as much as others.

I am concerned about proposed taxes on fat and sugar, because again this affects the poor a lot more, proportionally.

And how far will this go? If this lunatic principle is adopted, then smokers and those who like a drink are also at risk of being targeted.

...Aaaaand the detriments of government run health care begin to surface. Chalk one up for the free market

Ideological illiteracy I would have to say.

This has nothing to do with healthcare. In fact I understand that the medical profession opposes this plan.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...s-8436802.html

Like all councils Westminster has to work out how to deal with a 10% cut in funds provided cover housing benefit and council tax either , because the resident does not have the means to pay in full or in part. Westminster has some of the most valuable rateable properties on Earth, a modest increase in rates in the higher bands would surely cover the shortfall. But I guess politics demands that the council must live off the fat of the land.

By the way, your sig. I am sure Bin Laden's cronies were thinking exactly the same thing as they plotted their crimes.

I have mixed feelings, I find it annoying when you get morbidly obese people who can barely move let alone work and they got themselves into that state and nothing to get out of it (dieting perhaps) and the state pays them to continue that lifestyle. The same can be said with other things, can't remember the channel but there is that "16 kids and counting" program (or something along those lines) where again the state is paying so a couple can have an insane amount of children.

Of course as I said the feelings are mixed, normally the state shouldn't dictate how much you weigh or how many children you can have. On the other hand though for those who benefit greatly from the welfare state maybe it should apply, it could be seen as trying to get extra money from the state? Admittedly these is rather unfair on some parts of the lower class.

This post troubles me . Why would you assume that the state pays for people to be obese? Pensioners pay NIC , so their income is paid for. This measure does not only affect the unwaged, but those on minimum wage or modest incomes too, the issue there being that wages are so low that the state is effectively subsidizing their employment with taxpayer's money. But that is another issue. The fact that people have been persuaded to think along these lines, allows the state to target people with little effective resistance from the public.

In summary

-The rent is too damned high
-Incomes for many in work are far too low, and taxpayers have to make up the different, effectively many employed in the private sector may as well be public sector employees
- People are taxed to buggery, but the fat people and the ill , if they are poor, will have to more simply because Westminster Council says say.
- Starbucks, which has many outlets in Westminster, pays feck-all Corporation Tax.

[Heinz Guderian]

Is this reasonable? Are we not supposed to be living in a free country. How much will they spend snooping on chubby people?

i spend quite alot of time snooping on chubsters. unfortunately if they are poor and a bit lazy, they will consume cheap easy food such as doner kebabs and food from Iceland (the supermarket). In fact, if you go to frozen food markets, you'll often see fatties in leggings (at their max capacity) who will not have any reusable bags with them. This food will make them fatter.

Then when they've stocked up on fags, Birdseye Waffles and Iceland value chicken drumsticks, they'll be carring 8 plastic bags (which they wont reuse) to the bustop even though they live round the corner cos they've probably got free bus passes.

[Central Asian Qaghan]

Western problems for Western people. They should try to solve other more important issues than trivializing various factors.

[Garbarsardar]

Western problems for Western people. They should try to solve other more important issues than trivializing various factors.

Western people? Saudi Arabia has higher prevalence than the UK, Egypt higher prevalence than France or Germany. 20% of the world's obese are Chinese and according to WHO there is a rising trend of obesity in Central Asia. Trivialize this now.

[Central Asian Qaghan]

Western people? Saudi Arabia has higher prevalence than the UK, Egypt higher prevalence than France or Germany. 20% of the world's obese are Chinese and according to WHO there is a rising trend of obesity in Central Asia. Trivialize this now.

Biased sources, particularly the Harvard one. However, Central Asia is in the low 10-19.9 which is average when compared to the US and Western countries. Try again.

[MathiasOfAthens]

There shouldnt be automatic benefits to treat obese releated diseases but then again there should also be weight lost programs to help those lose weight. You might be poor and not able to afford healtier foods.

[NRohirrim]

I'm looking forward if that could work. If yes, I would add alcoholics, drug-addicted, smokers.

[gaunty14]

I have mixed feelings, I find it annoying when you get morbidly obese people who can barely move let alone work and they got themselves into that state and nothing to get out of it (dieting perhaps) and the state pays them to continue that lifestyle. The same can be said with other things, can't remember the channel but there is that "16 kids and counting" program (or something along those lines) where again the state is paying so a couple can have an insane amount of children.

Of course as I said the feelings are mixed, normally the state shouldn't dictate how much you weigh or how many children you can have. On the other hand though for those who benefit greatly from the welfare state maybe it should apply, it could be seen as trying to get extra money from the state? Admittedly these is rather unfair on some parts of the lower class.

[NRohirrim]

Of course as I said the feelings are mixed, normally the state shouldn't dictate how much you weigh or how many children you can have. On the other hand though for those on benefit greatly from the welfare state maybe it should apply?

For sure. Nobody dictates to anybody how many children or how big weight. State benefits are what we're talking about.

[Whukid]

...Aaaaand the detriments of government run health care begin to surface. Chalk one up for the free market

[MathiasOfAthens]

...Aaaaand the detriments of government run health care begin to surface. Chalk one up for the free market

LMFAO what? Where do you get NHS=bad from this?

For one free market does not mean you cant have a NHS. The UK is indeed a free market.

Secondly, chalk what up to the US (since your obviously referring to the US here)? There are prob more obese people in the US than in NHS countries.

Try an experiment for me... apply for insurance from a US healthcare provider and explain to them how you are morbidly obese and you want an affordable policy.

[Whukid]

LMFAO what? Where do you get NHS=bad from this?

For one free market does not mean you cant have a NHS. The UK is indeed a free market.

Secondly, chalk what up to the US (since your obviously referring to the US here)? There are prob more obese people in the US than in NHS countries.

Try an experiment for me... apply for insurance from a US healthcare provider and explain to them how you are morbidly obese and you want an affordable policy.

Where do I get that the NHS is bad? a group people are being discriminated against (in this case those who are obese), and because the government is the only option they can't go anywhere else for healthcare. So in effect, you have a monopoly on this corner of the market that gets to screw people over at will without anyone to take advantage of it. Even better is the fact that its the GOVERNMENT, so there is no way it's going to break apart or fracture into a profit rich environment that will allow smaller, better run companies that would be more than willing to provide healthcare to everyone they can because it brings in revenue.

Secondly, where in my statement was I referring to the US? You realize we have our own brand of hellcare too now, right (comes in effect in 2014, but still)? Some of us were even on it before hand because we were raised in military families. But it's obvious that you were referring to the pre-Obamacare policies, so let's talk about that. You realize that the state regulations, requirements, and federal laws forbidding the companies to sell policies across state lines were the problem, and not the companies, right? There was literally no way for them to lower the prices, nor were there any reasons to do so. No competition = high prices.