Keep Your Laws (and Taxes) Off My Body

The WSJ Opinion Journal ran an editorial today arguing that “sin taxes” on snack foods would be ineffectual in curbing America’s ever expanding waistline. Indeed, there is considerable evidence that government interference in free markets have already contributed to the obesity epidemic through several mechanisms including agricultural subsidies on energy dense, nutrition sparse food products. Moreover, Washington’s instincts in the present health care debate are equally wrong-headed, including plans to remove provisions for insurers to risk-stratify individuals for coverage. Making it economically easier to remain obese will not help these patients or reduce health care costs, and will certainly not prevent future obesity.

Why shouldn’t individuals with the preventable conditions absorb the costs of their excesses? Why should airlines (or other industries) be forced to accommodate obese passengers by passing the cost of transporting these individuals onto other air travelers (not to mention the discomfort of an adjacent seat)? Why shouldn’t the obese fliers be required to pay for 2 seats? Better yet, why not let the airlines charge a fare by the pound? Why not let businesses reward their employees by reducing their health insurance contributions in exchange for life-style mediated changes such as weight loss? The WSJ editorialist correctly dismisses the possibility of a tax on obese people, but I am surprised that liberals have not found a way of working it into their cap and tax legislation since the more calories consumed the greater the C02 emitted.

Certainly, more government intervention is not the answer, rather government should dismiss ideas of further shielding people from the ultimate costs of their lifestyle decisions.