Trefoil is right. SimonLee13 - you're just giving evidence to support the side you're opposing.Trefoil said:Um, you're just proving it's mostly environmental like he said. How is that helping your argument dofus?
Trefoil is right. SimonLee13 - you're just giving evidence to support the side you're opposing.Trefoil said:Um, you're just proving it's mostly environmental like he said. How is that helping your argument dofus?
This post wins.JaredR said:Make bigger seats so that everyone benefits...
Um, I see...sam04u said:Again Capitalism proves to be the cause of all evil.
You totally missed the point of everything I said. Cut out the idea of "profit" and then with the same cost of tickets today, there could be bigger and more comfortable seats. At the end of the day the purpose of these airlines is not for comfort and affordability, but rather it's for profit.zimmerman8k said:No. They'd just complain they were way too expensive.
cats are pretty small man, i know some cats who could have one sausage and live comfortablysam04u said:
exactly. Just like we charge people more for extra luggage, we should charge more for extra "baggage"withoutaface said:Mostly your own retarded fault you're a fatcunt -> pay for your own extra seat.
It's the most base, simple logic you could possibly apply.Serius said:thats the worst logic i have ever heard of.
We are not talking about your average obese person here. 99% of the australians that fall under the classification of overweight easily fit into an airline seat, this has nothing to do with the obesity epidemic. We are talking about morbidly obese people, people who cannot physically fit into a standard airline seat so they need to buy two.that bloke said:It's the most base, simple logic you could possibly apply.
And regardless, one doesn't have to go so far as famine to see the logic. Last time i wandered around Vietnam, Thailand, Brunei, i didn't see too many fat people. And i sure as shit didn't see too many fat kids! These places might be third world by our standards, but they typically have full bellies and smiles on their faces. Those "genetically predisposed" folk in these countries seem to get by without becoming obese. Perhaps because they are not lazy gluttonous bastards.
Obesity epidemic? Bleh, what a shite state of affairs it is when such a term could exist. And if such an epidemic exists, shouldn't there be drastic action to combat it, and not more allowances made for it?? It could almost be likened to monetary endorsement of being a lard-arse. Hey, the courts say its OK for me to be obsese, so hey, its OK for my child to be obese too! YAY.
"Imagine explaining jogging to some starving Somali?
- Yeah, well, its like this. I eat so much, i have to run so's i don't get fat, eh"
Ofcourse an airline could exist in such circumstances. It's quite possible to achieve a permanent state of "break even", where the workers including the higher ups would all be paid a reasonable amount. Instead of a system where the purpose is to exploit the customers by attempting to squeeze out as much money as possible, in order for there to be more profit. Do you understand that concept? Such an airline would be more appealing due to the fact that it would be focused around providing the best service for the customers, at the most affordable rate possible. So there would be no "free" service, just very good service (likely at the same costs).murraytaylor123 said:sam04u, do you think that if there was no concept of 'profit', that the plane, or the the entire airline, would exist at all??
do you honestly think that an organization like this would go out of its way to provide a free service to everyone, regardless of the costs involved to the airline of doing this?
you rubbish capitalism for giving advantage to some and disadvantaging others, and this is true, but under a socialist rule, everyone is to be equal - equally poor and impoverished.
I'm struggling to work out whether or not I support what you're saying.sam04u said:Ofcourse an airline could exist in such circumstances. It's quite possible to achieve a permanent state of "break even", where the workers including the higher ups would all be paid a reasonable amount. Instead of a system where the purpose is to exploit the customers by attempting to squeeze out as much money as possible, in order for there to be more profit. Do you understand that concept? Such an airline would be more appealing due to the fact that it would be focused around providing the best service for the customers, at the most affordable rate possible. So there would be no "free" service, just very good service (likely at the same costs).
That's fine with me buddy. If everyone has to be poor for them to be equal, for them to not have more value in every sense of the word, other than for their merits, then I'm all for it. Bring on mass poverty.
Ofcourse the truth is that is complete rubbish. There are enough sausages to go around. And under a fair system, 70% of the cats get twice as much sausage.
What a suprise that a person who named itself rockyroad said that.Rockyroad said:No way. Eating is an addiction like any other. It's harder than you think to quit. They must hate themselves enough already. We don't need to punish them any further. They should get the same treatment and price as anyone else. Yes Overweight people have right to extra airline seat.