When you fly you are given a weight limit for you luggage. A base amount might be 20Kg or 23Kg, which is not that much for a long trip. Ryanair charge €12 per Kg for overweight bags (and more for each extra bag).
And yet as you queue up you see people of all shapes and sizes and their weight differences make the luggage weights look insignificant. So why not charge passengers by their combined body and luggage weight rather than per seat?
This may seem rather odd, even discriminatory. But the heavier an aeroplane is the more fuel it uses. So the airlines costs are affected and in a market prices should be (partly) determined by costs.
The economics of this idea is known as price discrimination. Customers are charged different prices for the same product. Usually this is according to when they buy, or where they buy the product, but this is a quite reasonable extension of the idea.
Of course for overweight people this will be a new way of improving on the market failure caused by the 'lack of information' goods - high fat foods!
What about people who abuse the hand luggage rules and cram the overhead lockers with all their crap that weighs a tonne leaving no room for anyone elses. There are people who weigh more and those that weigh less, it’s called diversity. If you don’t like diversity and difference then lock yourself away.
ReplyDeleteFat people should clearly pay for the weight they add to the planes they fly on. Not only do they have fat which might as well carry another 20 kg+ luggage bag, but it ruins the journey for a passenger such as the one sitting next to this larger and selfish individual to his left. I would certainly complain and make a case for it if I were him. I believe that every clearly overweight individual should have four tests. The four basic suggestions involve a calculation based on weight, waist measurement, BMI, and the fourth one is an actual seat test... The fact that these fat people will haveto pay extra would give them a motivation to lose weight, helping to waste less money through the NHS, and there would be less deaths per year. It also means that aeroplane businnesses will not have to waste as much fuel on planes. It is even a risk for the passengers, maybe even the plane will fall down and crash. Silly fatties.
ReplyDeleteIf there were to be a charge based on weight, those who were simply big would have to pay more than short people. Another option, instead of the sliding scale, would be to declare a weight above which you have to pay an extra lump sum. But would it be too difficult to decide where to draw this line? What is classed as fat?
ReplyDeleteI think the answer is very simple. Get the passengers to sit in a test seat. If they can fit in it without bulging out either side, then fine. If they don't fit, get them to pay for a double seat. This would prevent fellow air travellers being squashed for the whole journey.
No its not called diversity its called obesity. what exactly is different from smokers and most people who are obese?? They are both lifestyle choices aren't they-a rational person has the choice to smoke and also to eat excessively.Also they both have negative externalities so if smokers have been punished (through their inability to smoke in public areas) because of its externalities then it makes sense that the obese should also be punished. I think this article is a perfect example of the rewards and punishment system which economics prides itself on.
ReplyDeleteThe issue with this is that in order for the charge to be fair it would have to apply everyone above a certain weight.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, because not everyone above a certain weight is so because of their own choices. They may be very tall, or have some other medical condition. Even those who are obese may be genetically predisposed to be so. It is certainly true that those people whose parents were born during times of famine are, due to certain elements of Lamarckian evolution, genetically predisposed towards obesity, and advances in genome mapping technology mean that they may be a point in the near future where more genetic markers will be identified which predispose people to obesity, at which point it becomes an issue of discrimination. Some would say it already is, since there is little doubt that these markers do exist.
A BMI based approach would have flaws because it would amount to effectively charging short people more than tall people.
The only solution to the first problem would be for airlines to have access to medical records, or even sometimes to require genome mapping, something clearly unrealistic.
There appears to me no practical way to implement this scheme.
Tim, i'd like to agree with John on this, because smoking has 0% to do with genetics and is all choice as you stated, however as John said people who are very fat probably have genetic issues related with obesity. Therefore fat people don't necessarily have a choice just as people can't choose their race. Would you say its fair for people to stop others boarding planes or charging extra if you were coloured, no. This would just be apartheid again which follows the same principle as fat people who don't necessarily have a choice. I also doubt that a seat designed for an average person would be comfortable for fat people either so the best thing to do is just live with it. It's not often a very fat person will sit next to you with their stomach hanging over the armrests
ReplyDeleteGalen I have to disagree with your first comment... and agree with Tim's comment... because it is an individual's choice as to whether they eat excessive amounts and do sod all to reduce their size... and Yes John some people do have genetic problems causing them to be obese and a solution to solve the fact that it is unfair on some having to pay more because of a problem not cause by them and by instead by their genetics, when booking their ticket -online or in a travel agent or whatever, they should state this and it should perhaps give them a slight discount, BUT (from now on im putting all my judgments on your opinion aside) in my opinion... even if they do have a condition of some sort... and they require two seats... even if they aren't that large... for the comfort and respect of the person potentially sitting next to them they should pay more so everyone is comfortable... i sure as hell would complain if i had a turd as big as that man in the picture sitting next to me... i'd probably rather stay in the toilet the whole flight until seatbelt signs were on...
ReplyDeleteI generally agree with what John has been saying.
ReplyDeleteAs much as it seems like an excellent initial idea for airlines to charge those that overfill the single seat, in practice it would be highly impractical.
Of course, I totally see where people are coming from as I have had to experience the harsh reality of a fat person overflowing onto my seat.
But where would the line be drawn? How would a person be judged as being too fat or being a suitable weight?
The only way a system could work would be if airlines had medical records available to them as well as if they were to undertake a series of height and weight tests on all passengers.
This would be highly impractical as it would add a significantly greater time to the already long period of time flying takes at the airport. As well as this it would add a greater cost onto the ever increasing cost of a flight.
People may not be comfortable with airlines having possession of medical records if these records are required to prove any medical condition a person may have. These records could be fantastic targets for computer hackers. Government security is very tight and so the thought of hacking a much easier target as, say, an airline would excite the hackers I am sure.
If the whole idea went ahead, it would only be a matter of time before a member of airline staff is out of work after being falsely branded as being a kiddy fiddler by a stupid parent.
Would airlines compete to allow fatter people on for cheaper thus eventually causing the whole system to revert back to normal as they appeal to the wider market which, considering that more and more people are suffering from obesity, happens to include fatter people.
All of this would probably deter a significant proportion of airline travellers which would be bad for the airlines, bad for the airport operating companies, bad for the aircraft manufacturers but good for the planet.
But lets say it all did go ahead. Why stop at air travel? Why not introduce a similar scheme at all railway stations before people board trains? The commute to and from London does get very tight at times, and I hate to say it but the fat people do play their part.
All in all I think the idea is ludicrous and impossible to manage. The whole idea would be expensive to the point where, if you have a problem you may as well pay for two seats or business class in the first place.
I do understand why people would say that fat people should pay but I don't think it's an idea that would work effectively. First of all if fat people pay according to their weight then what about those who are skinnier. Also a fat short person could weigh the same as a tall slender healthy person.
ReplyDeleteSince for flights you pay per seat then, the fat person should pay for how many seats they will take up. It is their fault they are fat, no excuses. They allowed themselves to get to that size. They shouldn't pay for how much they weigh but instead for how many seats they take up.