Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.



Disin' French Fries

To each, according to his feed
  (+1, -5)
(+1, -5)
  [vote for,

Medical costs are bankrupting the US, with the obesity epidemic at the forefront of completely preventable, yet highly costly diseases. We've tried pretty much everything, but one fad diet after another keeps failing, the FDA keeps issuing new guidelines, but nothing seems to be helping.

Smart politicians (e.g. Mayor Bloomberg) have seen the light, but their efforts are being blocked at every turn by voters, who want to have their cake and eat it too. Not to mention that eating more causes global warming, too.

But the solution is staring right at us:

Use the body fat guidelines to "adjust" or weigh voting power. 25% over your ideal body fat index? Your vote value is adjusted appropriately during the pre-vote weigh- in. Now, you can't just keep voting yourself more and more pie. No more of that "pound for pound, he's the best <insert useless throwaway compliment here> around".

Let's see how quickly we can become the fittest nation on Earth!

theircompetitor, Dec 04 2013

Weight based voting Weight-based_20Voting
[theircompetitor, Dec 04 2013]

Apply this! Fat-Cat_20See-Saw
at the voting booth [lurch, Dec 04 2013]


       There is nothing quite like disenfranchisement to make America great again!   

       In addition to this solution, a ban on all chairs would help, as sitting is also a strong cause of preventable disease. State sponsored chair burnings will help get this nation back in shape.
swimswim, Dec 04 2013

       Excellent, [swimswim], you're getting into the spirit of it. No Stool For You
theircompetitor, Dec 04 2013

       // Let's see how quickly we can become the fittest nation on Earth! // Considering the voter turnout rates I suspect that this would have only marginal motivational value.   

       In addition you'd have people arguing that this was politically motiviated because excess weight is unevenly distributed along social or racial divisions which tend to favor one political party or the other.   

       If you really want to motivate people, hit them in the pocketbook. You could make a real impact with a tax rate difference, but you'd probably have people saying that was unfair since I've hear that in 1st world countries, poor people tend to be fatter than rich people.   

       You could make a pretty good argument for the fairness of adjusting health insurance premiums based on various indications of health, but we seem to be focusing more and more on making those fees uniform rather than fair.   

       One more idea: hit em in the taste buds. You can't eat things that taste good unless your in the "ideal" range. In the "needs improvement" range, you just get bland food. For those in the "unhealthy" catagory, all food it tainted with foul tasting artificial flavors.   

       Then again I'd rather not have the nanny state be that involved in my life.
scad mientist, Dec 04 2013

       I don't think this idea would work because I think there's something to the microbial theory of obesity. That and it's fat shaming, which for some reason seems to be an accepted form of discrimination. More costly? Maybe, but obese people tend to live shorter, so maybe not.
the porpoise, Dec 04 2013

       What is the difference between this idea and the one linked?
calum, Dec 04 2013

       In pounds?   

       It is the reverse of it, calum
theircompetitor, Dec 04 2013

       The reverse of it insofar as your vote's worth is inversely proportional to your weigh, rather than directly proportional? That is so slim a distinction as to be no distinction at all. The core idea in both instances is to make the worth of a vote a function of the weight of the prospective voter. This posting would be better as an annotation on Aristotle's 12 year old idea.
calum, Dec 04 2013

       that's like saying taxing the rich is the same as taxing the poor, since it's taxes. What are you talking about?   

       The idea is quite obviously (to me) not serious, and I would certainly lose suffrage under it :)
theircompetitor, Dec 04 2013

       I am not assessing the idea you have posted on its own merits or demerits but the idea in relation to its existence on the halfbakery, given that the core notion of the idea - being worth of votes being linked to the weight of the voter - has already been dealt with on the halfbakery. On this basis, the idea you have posted is, if at all, a bawhair away from being redundant per the help file.   

       I will say, though, that I am not overfussed as to whether it stays or not and won't be upset if you want to prune this convo from the thread.
calum, Dec 04 2013

       Anorexic s unite! You have nothing to lose!
popbottle, Dec 06 2013

       Another modest proposal: encourage doctors to prescribe weight-loss / appetite-suppressing drugs. It's not fair that the food industry gets to use modern technology and marketing to make food addictive, but I'm not allowed to use equally- powerful technology to lose weight.   

       Also, your plan would give astronauts (weightless) infinite votes.
sninctown, Dec 06 2013


back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle