Should the overweight pay more for airfare?

[j0frenzy]

An airline can try. Doubt I'd ever fly with them. Mostly because this messes with my flight system. I like the least amount of bullshit in my way as possible when I fly. Making me get on a scale and pay a weight fee when I get to the airport is just an extra step in my process. I would rather pay for my ticket online and never have to think about it again. I barely put up with checking bags as is.

 

[chadachada123]

Why should suitcases be treated differently than large people?

Because it's a lot easier to leave a shirt behind than leave a couple of meals behind.

Also it's racist: because you've just said that Oriental people should travel cheaper than Caucasians (Due to average weight), sexist: Because men will pay more than women (due to average weight), and are we weighed at the point of ticket purchase - or the point of getting onto the plane?

Do wheelchairs count? Do plastercasts count? Do I get a penny off if I don't wear a hat? What about a mankini?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How about just do it by seat size?

Here is a baby seat, a medium seat and a large seat. Pay according to what you can fit your ass into.

I have enough bloody trouble getting my legs into most seats and I'm only 6'2".

Your seat-size suggestion would still be racist/sexist according to your definition.

Calling it racist/sexist still fails though, otherwise you'd be saying that theme parks are racist/sexist for having height requirements for rides (some races/genders are shorter, yada yada).

Even IF we went with your definition of racist/sexist, why would this be a bad thing? This isn't airlines wanting to punish specific groups or anything, it's charging based on how much passengers cost. You could argue that it's racist to charge ME more per-pound than the average Asian guy (Edit: just re-read, you said that Asian people are smaller on average, whoops, replace with the fattest ethnicity), and sexist to charge women more per-pound than the average male. The whole thing is irrelevent, because SOMEONE or SOME GROUP is going to be charged more than another in some arguably unfair way.

I just think that per-pound is the most fair to the most people and makes the most sense given our current luggage rules.

A final note, "oriental" isn't used to describe people, you racist =p EDIT: Just found out via the internet that it's only considered politically-incorrect in some countries. Damn, keep forgetting that there are plenty of British/Aussie Escapists...

 

[VivaciousDeimos]

This may be an...interesting discussion, but here goes:

I stumbled across this article over at MSN, [a href=http://now.msn.com/living/0313-overweight-airline-passengers.aspx] the short version being that if you're charged more for heavy baggage, you should be charged more for being heavier[/a], after all the plane doesn't care where the extra weight is coming from, and fuel costs need to be made up somehow.

Stupid beyond belief.

If we're strictly talking weight, can I get money off for being skinny? Do we have to pay extra because we eat the in-flight meal? Do anorexics get a discount?

Or are we just hammering home that loathsome idea that people need to be super-skinny to be healthy?

Before we even touch on pregnancy.

According to Singer you should. And by "skinny" he means "110lbs", which isn't so much skinny as it is...really really skinny.

The [a href=http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/singer84/English]idea[/a] comes from Peter Singer, who I don't always agree with on his other views, but that's an entirely different can of ethical worms. He argues in this case that people over a certain weight, roughly 220lbs, should pay a surcharge, and people weighing 110lbs or under should be given a discount.

While I can see the reasoning behind charging more for a very large person (though 220 is hardly "huge"), offering a discount to smaller people doesn't follow the same logic. They still occupy an entire seat, meaning that's one less other person that can fly.

That was something that occurred to me, but I didn't include in the OP; there are plenty of people who weigh over 200lbs, who are healthy, they just have a lot of muscle. Are they penalized as well?

 

[direkiller]

Crap. The weight of the passengers is minimal when compared to the weight of the luggage and the plane itself. I mean, a passanger 747 takes 200,000 tons of fuel to get to altitude and back. That's half the fuel tank. A few hundred extra pounds will make such a small difference to that usage of fuel that any "surcharge" is just a crap excuse to charge more money without raising your ticket price.

200,000 TONS!!! Bloody hell thats what twice the displacement of a fully loaded Nimitz Class super carrier. You may want to check your maths a second there.......

Max takeoff weight of a 757 depending on Variants between about 330 tons and 450 tons....

sorry about that, it was something a prof once told me in aero engineering, and I couldn't remember if it was 200,000 pounds or 200,000 tons, or now that I think about it, it was gallons. Sorry, I've been pretty exhausted lately and wasn't thinking clearly.

it was probably pounds
aircraft fuel is almost always in pounds(with fuel consumption done in lb/hour)

to put it in perspective:
200,000 gallons of fuel is about 1.3 million pounds or about 400,000 lb over the maximum takeoff weight of a 747 so I dont think it was gallons

 

[DeltaEdge]

I respectfully disagree. If someone is actually taking up more than one seat and their body is going to leak onto other passengers, then yes, I think they should pay for the extra seat because I don't want obese flesh severing my wall of personal space and pressing against me on a 5 hour trip across the states possibly leaking of perspiration. But if someone just weighs a lot, if they still fit perfectly into their seat, then I don't think they should be charged. Air planes are expensive enough as is, and if we give them this, then they will probably start trying to charge people to go to the bathroom on planes.

 

[Sangreal Gothcraft]

They should factor in Height as well and overall fitness.....I mean a person can be 5'8...200 pounds...but have little fat...all almost all muscles.....I mean muscles weighs..a lot..

Except this isn't supposed to be about discrimination based on fitness level, they claim they are talking about weight. A 250lb weight lifter costs just as much fuel as someone who is fat and weighs 250lbs.

Or perhaps they should also factor how much rooms thier bums take place.....yeah i know cruel>.>. But whatever. I mean tickets ARE expensive...hence why i don't travel as much as i used too.. But the weight thing did sound like Discrimination to my eyes and ears.

 

[Starik20X6]

I don't think fatties should be charged 'extra' per se, rather, everyone should be charged per kilogram (or pounds if you're in a country that uses outdated systems of measurement). Or, you pay for a certain amount of weight. Either way, it's pretty crap that I should have to pay the same amount as someone who is putting twice as much strain on the engines as myself.

If McDonald's and other crappy fast food restaurants were smart they'd charge their customers based on body fat percentage. You'd have a scale in the line in front of the cashier with a big digital readout so everyone can see and it'd also show body fat percentage.(Don't ask how. It's super-science.)THEN you could determine price based on that number. Really high body fat? You get to increase the price of the meal by a set amount because you KNOW the fatties will shell out the big bucks for all that greasy, cheesy garbage. They'd rake in even BILLIONS more! Capitalism at its finest!

I have a set of scales that can tell me my body fat percentage.

 

[Westaway]

Yes, because I think it would be funny and it doesn't affect me in any way.

took the words right out of my mouth.

 

[Waaghpowa]

If this happens, I say we start charging a noise tax on movie tickets to discourage the loud mouth Americans from coming to the theater.

Or how about charging Italians a surcharge for entering a china store because they talk with their hands and risk knocking things over.

(Joking if it wasn't obvious)

Personally, I'm 260 pounds. You'd swear I didn't weigh that much because I've got a great deal of muscle mass from my years on a swim team. Should I get charged more because I'm 30 pounds over the limit?

 

[Waaghpowa]

Nobody reaches 260 pounds from swimming. You're a fatty MC fat fat.

Yes, because you're just so familiar with someone you've never met right?

 

[Rblade]

Yes, no, yes, and hell-fucking-no, respectively.

Just read my post right after yours. If you charge people for extra bags (ie: taking up space and weighing the plane down), then you should charge for physical weight too. That's it. Why should suitcases be treated differently than large people? If you can save money by not bringing luggage (costing the airline less), why shouldn't you be able to save money by losing some weight (also costing the airline less)?

what about dudes? a perfectly healthy, fit, human male would probably weigh in at about 80 or so kilograms.
Where the average female could easily weigh 10 to 15 kg less. Thats upto 20%, thats the weight of an extra set of luggage.

Ofcourse this is silly, that would be straight up sexcism and discrimination. But the point is still the same.

you can't compare how many pants a person decides to take on his journey, with the way he is build and or his life choices. You have immediate and direct controll over how much you pack, how much you weigh can have a stagering number of terrible reasons, almost nobody choose to grow excessivly big. with the exception of really needing 2 seats, but thats very uncommon.

You pay for your seat and the service and everything. Safe your plans for when we invent teleportation and you get charged per atom.

 

[Dejawesp]

Yes, no, yes, and hell-fucking-no, respectively.

Just read my post right after yours. If you charge people for extra bags (ie: taking up space and weighing the plane down), then you should charge for physical weight too. That's it. Why should suitcases be treated differently than large people? If you can save money by not bringing luggage (costing the airline less), why shouldn't you be able to save money by losing some weight (also costing the airline less)?

what about dudes? a perfectly healthy, fit, human male would probably weigh in at about 80 or so kilograms.
Where the average female could easily weigh 10 to 15 kg less. Thats upto 20%, thats the weight of an extra set of luggage.

Ofcourse this is silly, that would be straight up sexcism and discrimination. But the point is still the same.

you can't compare how many pants a person decides to take on his journey, with the way he is build and or his life choices. You have immediate and direct controll over how much you pack, how much you weigh can have a stagering number of terrible reasons, almost nobody choose to grow excessivly big. with the exception of really needing 2 seats, but thats very uncommon.

You pay for your seat and the service and everything. Safe your plans for when we invent teleportation and you get charged per atom.

So what if its not a choice? It still costs the company more to transport a fat person than a thin one.

 

[Queen Michael]

Yes, because I think it would be funny and it doesn't affect me in any way.

Aaaaand here's my new answer to lots of political questions.

 

[Dejawesp]

Nobody reaches 260 pounds from swimming. You're a fatty MC fat fat.

Yes, because you're just so familiar with someone you've never met right?

The olympic swimming champion of the world ways 80 pounds less than you and I bet he's swimming a whole lot more as well. On top of that he is 6.4 feet tall which means that he is about 20 pounds below average weight for his height.

Swimming makes you fit and lean.

Arnold Schwarzenegger at his peak, Conan style pumping iron and taking all the supplements the world had to offer, world champion body builder weighed 10 pounds less than you, the casual swimmer.

Be honest, you took some swim classes in lower grade school and then spent one and a half decade in front of the computer and now at 1/8th of a ton you claim swimmer status but I bet you never take your shirt off at the beach now do you

 

[Waaghpowa]

Be honest, you took some swim classes in lower grade school and then spent one and a half decade in front of the computer and now at 1/8th of a ton you claim swimmer status but I bet you never take your shirt off at the beach now do you

What is that phrase? When you assume....

I admit, I'm not built like an olympic swimmer, but I'm not fat either. I know guys who aren't much taller than I am who weigh as much as me despite not actually being fat. There are people who are just naturally big and have wide shoulders.

What's with the fat hate? Get beat up by fat kids? Keep your prejudices and assumptions to yourself when it comes to judging people you haven't met. I'll avoid making the assumption that you're just another keyboard warrior, too insecure about themselves to say anything outside of the anonymous world we call the internet and give you the benefit of the doubt.

Maybe we should have a post charge for people who justify discrimination and insults as "discussion".

 

[IPunchWithMyFists]

This shouldn't be that difficult.

You pay for each seat you use.

So YES.

 

[galdon2004]

No. It will lead to more lawsuits than the court systems can handle, and it just isn't fair. The airplane isn't going to use a significantly higher amount of fuel because of a few passengers being over 220. A 747-400 took off at a gross weight of 892,450 pounds. The typical 747-400 passenger jet has an empty takeoff weight of ~394,000 pounds, and a max loaded weight of 875,000 pounds.



Curious as to how many 220 pound passengers make up the difference? 2100. To be perfectly precise, 2185.90909090909090909090909090909090909090.

Riiiight, so how much fuel do you figure a 747 can carry? Do you have any idea what that fuel weighs*? How about factoring in everything in the cargo hold?

I agree that a 747 can lift an impressive amount of weight, but come on, you're missing a lot...

Especially the fuel: That empty takeoff weight you quoted excludes fuel. Jet fuel weighs between 6.5 and 7lbs/gal and the 747-400 has a max fuel capacity of 57,285gal. So at max capacity, that plane would be carrying 372,352lbs of fuel. Granted they never fully fuel unless absolutely necessary (specifically because of the weight), but just look at that figure; A full tank nearly doubles the weight of the aircraft before a single passenger or their luggage gets on the plane.

Charging them extra airfare with that justification is just discrimination, it's as simple as that.

And yet exceeding max carry-on weight by a couple pounds gets you an overcharge. Air travel (especially continental, since there are good alternatives) is not a right. It's a luxury. If they can charge more for a couple extra pounds of luggage, they can damn well do it for 300lbs+ passengers (which is where I would personally draw the line if it was my decision).

Ok, do you have any idea how absolutely retarded that was? The empty takeoff weight HAS to include fuel; planes cannot fly without fuel. They just CAN'T.