Hacker News Reader

Comment by Towaway69 | Hacker News Reader

Would you agree with making "heavier" people paying more for flights?

It is interesting that discrimination is OK when based on "things" but not when applied to humans. After all "heavier" humans also use more resources just as "heavier" cars do.

View on HN

Aren't some US carriers charging plus-size people 2 seats if they don't fit now? I think it's banned in Canada. But waist and weight limit seems reasonable without some sort of medical exemption.

It seems reasonable to me that to occupy two seats costs the fare of two seats.

If I want to eat two pizzas, I have to pay for two pizzas, regardless of medical condition… If I want two gallons of gas instead of one… If I want two months of Netflix instead of one…

It’s unclear why people expect that some should consume two seats and pay for only one…

Some do. About 15 years ago I was doing a regular weekly commute and due to my size at the time, Southwest would ask me to purchase two seats. If the flight was not full they would refund one ticket. Since Southwest uses first come first serve seating, you would get preboard status and a little card to place in the second seat.

I was ok with that accommodation, it seemed reasonable and with a little research into the flights and how often they were truly full it was rare that i didn’t get a refund.

Humans are discriminated all the time: by passport, by place of birth, by sex, by wealth, etc.

Maybe some airlines will come eventually with new fare where total weight with all clothes and luggage would be billed with different tiers, let's say 5: <20, 20-50, 50-100, 100-150, 150+ kg.

Probably the only thing stopping them are privacy concerns. On the other hand, for frequent flyers it could be a great thrill to be told that they had lost weight since their last flight.

Maybe. Many countries in the EU already place heavy taxes on engine displacement, so a curb weight tax or vehicle size tax wouldn't be something entirely new.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

So drawing parallels is no longer allowed? Is lateral thinking also banned?

Or do heavier people not use more resources then skinnier humans? What's wrong with drawing a parallel to cars?

> do heavier people not use more resources then skinnier humans?

You’re arguing as if charging heavy people more to fly isn’t a thing. It is. And I don’t think that’s abhorrent nor even unfair.

I didn't know, I didn't know it was a thing.

And yes, it's very murky as you say. There is a difference between genetic and chosen unfortunately the difference isn't obvious from just the optics.

> difference between genetic and chosen unfortunately the difference isn't obvious from just the optics

Okay, so let's get back to the actual topic. Help me understand how buying an SUV is fundamentally—beyond optics—similar to being genetically predisposed to obesity.

If you have a large family and use this SUV as a transporter for your children or if use this SUV as a status symbol, an outsider cannot differentiate between these two use-cases.

The genetics, in this case, is money: is the owner wanting to protect their family, has taken on debt to purchase this SUV just because they wish to have a "safer" car for their family. Or is the owner on their fourth SUV and it's just-another-car purchase. One owner is struggling, the other was born with a silver spoon.

Not everyone is born to be able purchase an SUV, being born with or without money can influence peoples life, just as their genetics.

Both are random attributes that are assigned upon birth.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com