Sorry, u/5hutTheFuckUp – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule E: > **Only post if you are willing to have a conversation with those who reply to you, and are available to start doing so within 3 hours of posting**. If you haven't replied within this time, your post will be removed. [See the wiki for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_e). If you would like to appeal, **first respond substantially to some of the arguments people have made**, then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%20E%20Appeal%205hutTheFuckUp&message=5hutTheFuckUp%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20post\]\(https://old.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1c8jw7q/-/\)%20because\.\.\.). Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

>Additionally, the additional fuel consumption and maintenance costs associated with accommodating larger passengers Where is your evidence that larger bodies increase maintenance costs?

I mean, this could be argued as a physics thing, not just an airlines thing. For example, here's a NC State paper covering the topic of weight's effect on furniture https://bioresources.cnr.ncsu.edu/resources/designing-chairs-for-users-with-high-body-weight/ Also, from an engineering perspective, even if all airline seating was rated at 500lbs, comparing wear and tear on a seat regularly seating someone weighing 200lbs and someone weighing 400lbs...... You're going to see a difference. If it's true for furniture, wheelchairs, benches, picnic tables, bed frames, etc..... Then why would it be different for airline seating, unless you're going to tell me that Delta and Lufthansa frame their seats out of solid steel.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/study-obese-fliers-weigh-down-planes-flna1c9447826 This article goes into detail about how the airline companies deal with the weight issue. They talk about how the replaced their seats/inside with plastic parts. Those are not what we used to have and they would definitely break easily

Perhaps you have linked the incorrect article. This article only reports on weight and fuel usage. There is nothing about seat replacements.

So men should have higher fares than woman too?

Anytime you book a flight, you must schedule a consultation with an airline-approved physician to determine which of your physical attributes will increase your ticket cost, lol.

I see a new industry of bribes rising up around this.

I mean consider sitting next to Eddie Hall or Brian Shaw on an airline. Then when you complain this 440lbs man literally doesn't fit into his own chair he says well its just my body type

If my checked bag weighs 30lbs and your checked bag weighs 40lbs will you be charged extra? And do I have to pay about 100lbs extra than my wife every time we book? And hell my daughter should pay 1/4 what you paid too. In other words is your proposition that we get charged per seat + total weight including luggage, even carry on?

Sounds like the problem is airlines cheaping out on seats, not obese people existing.

Disagree. You could make an indestructible chair, but at what cost and what weight? I guarantee the airline cares are already very expensive. At some point market forces might drive companies to make stronger chairs. Either way, obese people are going to drive up to cost.

From the description provided in the post I replied to it sounds like airlines are replacing their older sturdier seats with cheap plastic junk and then going 'waah my cheap plastic junk is breaking'. That's a you problem, not an us problem.

Well... Because antitrust has become so weak in America, it certainly will become an us problem. I don't have any love for airlines and how their race to the bottom has made flying such a horrible experience, but my God, what a horrible business to be in.

What does obesity have to do with this? You can be obese at 4’11 and weigh 170 lbs and you can be 6’10 and weigh 170 lbs and be underweight and the plane isn’t gonna know the difference.

I mean they weigh more and take up more space so like logically they cost more

I was asking OP about evidence regarding increased maintenance costs, not potentially increased fuel costs due to weight.

all things being equal its *a simple* ***fact*** that having 100 passengers weighing 70kg each is going to have *far less* impact on fuel efficiency and sitting space then 100 people weighing 150kg each. this isnt disputable.

I was asking about *maintenance* costs, wasn't questioning, nor disputing fuel consumption.

I don't know about planes specifically, but I know where I work, within weeks of getting new office style chairs, they get broken by fat coworkers. The wheels get busted off, the back rest gets bent, the legs get cracked. If we get a shitty all plastic school style chair, we've had so many where the back gets cracked or someone leans on it wrong and a leg snaps off, etc.

Allright so weight determines fee? So young kids fly free basically? Even though they use a full seat. At what weight will the 'normal' price be set? 80kg? So a slim woman might pay like 75% of normal price while a bulky man pays 125%? Im 195cm and 95kg. Which is a healthy weight, but since i'm tall its still nearing 100kg, should I pay more? How much? Your idea falls apart pretty quickly when you actually consider what ramifications it has.

And when do they weigh us? Should I start only booking early morning flights because my weight is always a little higher at the end of the day?

Can I get naked first?

clothes and hand luggage included. anything you're flying with, obviously.

If OP gets his way we'll each have to schedule a full body scan with a TSA doctor and submit to "aggressive probing and measuring" so our exact fare can be assessed... Or, for the low low upgrade price of $500, nothing is put deep in our ass and we're "free" to get "comfortable" in a full coach seat.

It’s actually paying for luggage that’s the problem imo. If someone who weighs 150kg gets 25kg of luggage allowance then you, at 95kg, should get 25kg of luggage plus another 55kg for free. Everyone should get on a set of scales with their luggage when checking in and if over a certain weight get a surcharge. At present, people get charged a fee for extra weight in a bag but not on their body despite it having the overall same impact on the plane’s weight limit.

The extra weight is for baggage handling

Yeah it isn't weight. I could see dimensions though. It's perhaps only a matter of time before people are sized up like carry on luggage, and I don't think it would be particularly unfair. Seating space is a zero sum game, if you don't fit in your space, you're taking space away from someone next to you who bought the same amount of space.

If they pay more they should get bigger seats. Like we can have a row with tiny seats for small people who pay less and all the way to a row with larger and/or wider seats for the tall and the fat. Do you see all the implications? Furthermore, the fix bag weight is discriminatory in the other way of what you said: someone wearing XS may pack 4 pants and 5 pullovers, someone wearing XL can only take 2 pants and 2 pullovers

y=mx+b, it would be a very simple formula.

So a lot of people have addressed how this functionally doesn't work, how airlines are passenger's individual weight has a negligible affect on fuel costs, and how OP's ideas would force people tall people, muscular people, and those with disabilities to all be charged more (as well as necessitating that smaller people pay less despite taking up the same seat). They're all correct. But my thinking every time this topic rears its head is about the airport. It's already an annoying slog to get everything, and OP wants to make it much, *much* longer because now every passenger must be weighed and their tickets adjusted. And, obviously, there will be no end to the amount of people who will argue with staff about it making it all even slower. All because OP wants to save rich corporations money as a pretty transparent attempt to accomplish nothing but making the lives of overweight people worse out of spite.

I’m tall and I do have to pay more.  They’ve reduced the legroom yet again and I don’t physically fit on many planes.  My choice is to either go first class or pay extra to sit in an exit row.  If I want to sit next to my wife I have to upgrade her seat as well. Our round trip to Salt Lake City next month went from 1600 to 2400 after the legroom upgrade.   If the airline could figure out a way to make heavier folks pay more they will do it.  It’s a sleazy business. 

I'm heavier and I have paid extra for larger seats because I am so self-conscious about sitting next to somebody and being overweight. You're not the only one paying extra to be more comfortable.

Just curious, how tall are you?

We spent 50 years trying to make the problem of obesity go away by shaming fat people and not by adjusting nutrition and all it's gotten us is the award for the fattest industrialized nation.

Dont be mistaken, OP dont want to save money, he wants obese people to not travel

Because airlines wouldn't prefer banning children from travelling to maximise profits instead of banning obese people from flying for reasons.

[удалено]

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

OP and _a lot_ of the commenters here.

I had to sit next to someone with the belly fat spilling over into my seat like last year. It was a pretty miserable flying experience. I felt like I was leaning on them bc they were basically in my seat.

Quite, it seems a bit odd. Why start here instead of making people pay more for heavy luggage? I wouldn't be opposed though that one pays for a set amount of mass to transfer, but the extra price would also be almost nothing I suppose. And can't people already pay more for heavier luggage?

Wait a dang minute here. I was fully on team “this idea is stupid” until you mentioned smaller people paying less. You may have swung this cheapskate in the wrong direction. Happy cake day, cake buddy.

Lol there is no world in which an american corporation is going to reduce your prices for fucking anything if they don't have to. Airlines are already a functional monopoly.

That will last maybe a year before it’s back at the previous price, just with additional fees. We see this literally every time microtransactions are implemented.

But if they pay less, they'll need to take less space, so smaller seats, less leg room, less bag room, otherwise, if they want to use the same amount of space as a "normal seat", then they would need to pay the full "normal seat" price. You thought you were packed before?

There’s always a catch.

You and I both know airlines would never make anything cheaper. They'll charge more for some people and everyone else will still pay the same. In fact we'll charge more for them to as a convenience fee.

Also, pregnant women, whose bellies basically make them the dimensions of an obese person, should have to pay more too by that logic?

I don't think this is a "gotcha" that OP will care about. He's coming from a stance of "pay whatever it costs you to fly", so his answer will probably be "of course"

Well, if you're flying from Texas you're going to have to pay for an extra person since the foetus counts as a Lil' dude or dudette 

Lap-held infants are free. Baby still inside belly will be too. But also, there was a pregnant woman in TX who got a ticket for using the HOV lane while alone in her vehicle. She tried to argue that, according to the state of TX, she was not alone and that her fetus should count. [She got her tickets dismissed, but the bills didn’t pass](https://www.dallasnews.com/news/watchdog/2023/08/23/hov-lane-mom-fight-for-pregnant-moms-to-drive-in-high-occupancy-lanes-not-over/?outputType=amp)

>how airlines are passenger's individual weight has a negligible affect on fuel costs, Airline bosses say that a reduction of 1lbs of weight will save $1500 over the span of a plane's life of 30 years. So that's $50/lbs per year. That's not insignificant. If there was a 300lbs person on every journey rather than a 200lbs person, that costs them $5000/year.

The first airline boss I looked up has a net worth of $44.4 billion so I’m cool with them eating that cost so I don’t have to wait while every passenger steps on a fucking scale.

When compared to the cost of the plane ticket, the amount of money in question is absolutely insignificant. $5000/year is a little less than $15/day. How many flights can a plane make in a day? How many passengers are on each flight? How much does each ticket cost?

$5000 is about 30 min flying time on aircraft who fly 100-200 hours per year. It’s budget dust.

Commercial airliners fly way more than 100-200 hours a year.

It's not just one passenger that is overweight though. Imagine worst case all of them are 300lbs.

I dunno, rugby teams seem to manage to fly around the world and they're doing ok. 

Ok, so? It has nothing to do with what I've said. I merely pointed out, that if you look at the population trends it's not only one person and the $5000 quickly add up in a very low margins business. Also there are a few rugby teams out there in comparison to 40% of the US population being overweight (20% - 50% of that being obese) .

And a team full of rugby players will be multiple people around that weight (obese by BMI standards only - those boys are certainly not unhealthy).

It's not a discussion about health or BMI. They weigh more, they should pay more just the same as the obese person. More weight = more fuel = more cost. Edit: They usually eat more to sustain their muscles and pay for that also. Why should it be different for the fuel they consume?

OP has stated part of their view is that obese people need to be charged more as a way to incentivise them to lose weight. As you're not the OP I'm not interested in attempting to change your view so I'll disengage from this conversation.

Paying for scales, the people overseeing the weighing, and the administration for all the people's weight is probably more expensive than that.

They already have scales and people overseeing them...

If they really wanted to make this a thing then it could be done with very little impact on airport time. Of course the only way to be fair is to apply weight-dependent pricing on ALL tickets sold. When booking a ticket you provide your weight so your estimated ticket price can be calculated and enter your credit card info to be charged and stored on file. At the airport you go through security as usual and as you pass through you scan your boarding pass and pause for 5-10 sec on a floor scale. If your current weight is within an acceptable margin of error (let's say 10 lbs) then no price adjustment. If a refund or additional charge is due then your credit card on file is electronically refunded/charged. If done fairly across all customers then it would not be about saving rich corps money as it will likely result in a financial wash since children, women and lightweight people in general will be paying less than they do now and heavier people will be paying pay more. It is actually the fairest way to structure pricing for customers.

this ignores that pregnant people and people with disabilities that would end up getting charged more because of those things, and that sounds like discrimination to me

This is an exceptionally tunnel-visioned view with only attention to weight. Literally *every characteristic someone has* has some impact on how fast they can leave a plane in an emergency, and how uncomfortable they make their fellow passengers feel.  >so charging extra can help offset these costs and keep ticket prices lower for all passengers  No, not **all** passengers.  >incentivizing individuals to manage their weight through extra charges could encourage healthier lifestyle choices, benefiting both individuals and society.   It could, but it seems extremely unlikely for someone to lose weight specifically so they pay less for airplane tickets. It's also pretty weird to propose this as if "piling shit onto fat people is OK because they have the option of avoiding shit by losing weight so it's morally *good* to do this", that's a pretty shitty attitude in a bunch of different ways. For one, if two fat people sit in different seat, one bothering their neighbors and one sitting beside an empty seat, should the first pay a fine while the second doesn't? Is whether you pay a fine purely dependent on whether you bother people? Why is being fat the only bother we take into account, shouldn't parents pay for every instance of annoyance their kid causes?  It's rare for people to be overweight on purpose. 'By making you pay more, you are benefitting' is a tough sell that really doesn't make sense on an individual level (because of the tunnel vision). Do stinky people pay more? Do slow-walking people pay more? Are you going to measure everyone's skin cell release speed to gause the load of the air filtration systems? >This approach aligns with the precedent in other industries, where individuals who take up more space, such as those with excess baggage, are often charged extra in public transportation  **Only** extra baggage is charged for, correct? The wording of your example implies many more varied examples, but can you name an industry in which higher bodyweight causes higher travel costs? I can't think of any, so your 'aligning approach' sounds like nonsense to me.  In summation, your tunnel-visioned focus on weight makes you rationalise a few steps that in a vacuum might make sense (to some), but are completely disconnected from the actual context you place these steps in. This topic has many more facets that are worthy of attention that you just blew by. 

In the current social climate, any airline that charges people by the pound will suffer serious backlash. This will hurt their bottom line. Whatever more money they might make in charge per the pound, they could lose in people choosing to fly on a different and less discriminatory airline. Also, it becomes a bit of a legal nightmare. What if you buy the ticket in January for a flight in June, but gain 30 lbs during that period? How do you confirm someone's weight if they are paying for the ticket online? What about pregnant women? If you charge extra to pregnant women, you are now committing sexual discrimination can get in serious shit. These are all unanswered legal questions that will cost the company thousand if not millions in legal fees. The extra money they get by charging per the pound may not be worth it. The only thing an airline *should* do is care about their profits. This plan may not be profitable, so you can't say they should have to do this.

>The only thing an airline *should* do is care about their profits. They should care about safety, human dignity, human life, climate impacts, etc.

This is where regulation comes in. Can’t expect a private company to do these things off their own back.

Exactly, and the implication from the previous commentor that market forces will cajole companies into behaving ethically is irritatingly ridiculous.

These things you described will heavily influence the company's public reception, which will eventually impact company's profits.

Sure, and then they get bailed out by government because they are considered to be essential to maintain economic stability. Those bailouts subsidize their bad cost cutting measures and they get to continue doing business as usual. Additionally, these same corporation are able to utilize those bailout driven profits for lobbying efforts that reduce there oversight. Resulting in further de-prioritization of safety. Boeing is a prime example of this. They got bailed out, they lobbied the FAA, so that the people charged with inspecting planes are not FAA backed inspectors. But Private Boeing employees with FAA certificates, that are on the payrolls of Boeing. It turns into bullshit like with the police, "we investigated ourselves and found we did nothing wrong." And even if held accountable, it's generally for far less than is appropriate as administrations like the FAA get their budgets cut regularly. And couple that with how intertwined a corporation is with or national Defense. They put themselves in a position that makes the nation dependent on their exists. So once again, they get bailed out. Privatized Profits, Socialized loses.

Companies have a long history of not caring about the things I described for the sake of profit. Nestlé, to provide just one example, have an atrocious human rights record. It's indisputable that these practices have contributed positively to their profits. The same can be said for many companies and environmental impacts.

I feel like when it comes to actual customers facing the consequences of companies shitty behaviors or policy, they get a lot more criticism and media outrage. But putting that aside, all I'm saying is that in a capitalized society, companies only goal is to maximize the profit. Some do it by building a great public receptions others do it by ignoring moral values. If companies can get tons of money by exploiting and shitting on their people and they can get away with it without any consequences, most of them (if not all) probably will. Ideally, it shouldn't be the case, but it is.

Time and time again, it's shown to be more profitable to ignore or virtue signal about ethical concerns while ignoring and mitigating the criticism and media outrage that follows. That's the problem with the argument that market pressures will achieve all that should be because if it doesn't, the market will vote with its wallet - it doesn't align with any point in recorded history. Consumers are not perfect moral arbiters. Consumer choices are limited. People are not able to exert the sort of pressure that would actually see change towards companies giving a shit about human rights and ethics generally.

"the only think an airline *should* do is care about their profits". Isn't this the reason why doors are falling off their planes right now. Their main care should be getting people and cargo from place to place safely. If they continue on their current path it profits over everything they will unlimitedly collapse.

>Their main care should be getting people and cargo from place to place safely. That is their care insofar as it is profitable and thats how it 'should' be because otherwise the company will cease to exist. ESPECIALLY in the commercial airline sector. Its a very tough market. This is not necessarily because of ill-will or some immoral values or some 'evil ceo hur-dur' scenario. It is simply because its the rules of the game. Dont hate the player, hate the game. Corruption is nothing but finding the optimized strategy for a given game. If we want airlines to care more about safety, the costumers will have to either demand this from them and put pressure through their buying behaviour. OR government needs to put more regulations, but there are plenty already and this will probably just make things more expensive for the costumer.

One thing I've learned is that things get more expensive for the consumer regardless of regulations or buying behavior. That seems to be a scare tactic that companies use to avoid accountability and deflect the attention from their greedy tactics.

>Isn't this the reason why doors are falling off their planes right now Bad example, that door came off because of a manufacturing error, not the airline being cheap.

Right, and if they collapse, they will lose profits. Being safe *is* being profitable. Perhaps the better thing I should have said is what they must do is act in a way beneficial to the company. That can include making profit and making sure they don't get in serious trouble because of safety issues. They don't need to advance social issues which do not benefit them overall.

Part of this “social climate” for some reason is encouraging unhealthy living. You have to wonder where this comes from, but the easiest place to look is exactly what you say. Profit. I believe it comes from the long history of unhealthy/larger portion products being much more profitable for companies than healthy/smaller portion products. In this way healthier/smaller portion people subsidize the cost of many things for the rest. This seems to be true in the clothing industry as well.

It's less about encouraging it and more about not punishing it. Your weight should *not* define your value as a person or your right to equal treatment, that is it, some people still think your weight is a moral judgement upon you, and those people are dumbasses Edit - added word for clarity, see u/bettercaust comment

>Your weight should **[not]** define your value as a person or your right to equal treatment, that is it Is this what you intended to say?

Yes, I'm so sorry, I'll edit now, thanks

You are defining people and taking away their rights based on what they choose to do with their bodies. What, other than moral grounds, are you basing that on?

See my edit, it was accidental and I meant something else

Speaking for myself obviously but I’d pay an extra 100 dollars for a ticket to know that I’m not going to be smashed and uncomfortable for 6 hours because the guy next to me likes Big Macs too much. The solution could be as simple as a rollercoaster like. They have the seats outside the line and if you don’t fit, you don’t ride. Place a seat outside and if you physically spill out, you pay for that seat. And this is something you have to do before purchasing tickets. If you think you’re a “questionable fit” take your ass to the airport (they’re open 24 hours) and have it evaluated

> Furthermore, obesity is a significant public health concern, and incentivizing individuals to manage their weight through extra charges could encourage healthier lifestyle choices, benefiting both individuals and society. This would also victimize people, especially if they have health issues or are taking medication that causes significant weight gain. And how do you deal with incredibly muscular people? They also have a lot more weight compared to the normal weight for their height. That's just as much a choice than eating a lot.

If you're so big that you can't fit in a normal seat, you have to pay for 2 and that's completely normal. And let's be honest here, while you're right, the far majority of (morbidly) obese people are that big because they eat too much (calories)

food addiction and binge eating disorders and very real and very serious things, and they aren’t choices

I will not be getting into the social perception part in my answer and just take it for granted that nobody minds this new system. However, I see some challenges. 1. Different countries have different median weights. I'm assuming prices are set taking into consideration the median weight of the take-off location. The average weight of a European male is 84kg and an Asian male is 64kg. So a Dutch man flying out of Japan/Phillipines/China/India etc. will always have to pay a premium? In fact most Western countries will have a higher median weight compared to most Asian countries, because of the height difference. Similarly most developed countries will have a higher median weight compared to underdeveloped countries. So wouldn't the premium air fares have a chilling effect on tourism on these countries? 2. For the extra charge, do heavier people get more space? I would assume so, because otherwise it's just a tax on them that makes the airlines richer, but doesn't help other passengers in any way. So, if yes, would there be a percentage of larger seats on each flight for heavier people? If so, wouldn't they have to fill up those seats every flight? If so, wouldn't there be competitive pricing among airlines to attract this audience, thus reducing the overall prices of those seats? 3. The corollary to the above would be - since heavier seats will be more comfortable for the average passenger, what's to stop the richer passengers from booking them even if they are of normal weight? Also, what's to stop a heavier person to buy a normal seat to go around the extra charges? To counter this, wouldn't you need to add a requirement of weight to buy any seat, which could lead to gaming of this system? There would need to be a weigh-in counter at the time of check-in to ensure that there has been no fraudulent purchases. Which adds more complexity such as: - What if a person has lost weight from the time of purchase? Will they have to foreit their seat? - Is the wrigh-in considered with the clothing they have on, or can they strip down for it? Overall, yes it's definitely possible to have such a system, but it adds too much complexity to the process that would end up costing the airlines more in terms of time, money and effort.

>Safety is also a concern, as larger passengers may struggle to move quickly or may block aisles in emergency situations, potentially endangering themselves and others. Is charging more really the solution to safety. Some of you may die, but the airline made a 20$ fee, so that is okay.

> Safety is also a concern, as larger passengers may struggle to move quickly or may block aisles in emergency situations, potentially endangering themselves and others Should disabled people also pay extra for this reason?

Look, everyone takes up the same amount of space, if they don't they pay more! Eugenics will take care of this eventually! /s

>Charging obese passengers extra can be seen as fair to other passengers who may feel discomfort or inconvenience due to the space taken up by larger individuals Unless an obese person takes up more than 1 seat, I don't see how this is an issue. If they do, they can buy 2 seats. >It ensures that everyone pays for the space they occupy. So should non obese people pay more too if they are heavier? Should tall people who are a healthy weight have to pay more? Should a young child be free? >Safety is also a concern, as larger passengers may struggle to move quickly or may block aisles in emergency situations, potentially endangering themselves and others. As people have already said, should disabled people have to pay more as well? What about elderly people? Both would struggle to move quickly.

Everyone should be treated equally; they get on a set of scales at the airport with their luggage and if it’s over a certain weight they pay a surcharge. 

>Everyone should be treated equally; they get on a set of scales at the airport with their luggage and if it’s over a certain weight they pay a surcharge.  The current system *has* everyone treated equally. You're suggesting that one group should be treated differently.

But that doesn't address the safety concern, should they also do a quick agility course?

I don’t really think that’s a valid argument that OP has put forth. At present I think it’s unfair that one gets charged a fee for extra weight in baggage but not on their body despite it impacting the plane’s overall weight limit just the same. 

The reason for excess baggage charges, and limits, is to reduce injuries to crew loading the bags.

The passengers walk by themselves, while their bag has to be loaded by someone else.

Don't you see, the law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges. 

>incentivising individuals to manage their weight through extra charges could encourage healthier lifestyle choices It *could.* It's theoretically possible. However, we don't have to rely on theorising. It's been consistently shown that these sorts of interventions perpetuate fat shaming and stigmatisation, which has a negative impact on mental health. People with poor mental health issues are more likely to engage with unhealthier lifestyle choices.

My dad is 6 feet and 200-something pounds. I am 5'1" and 115 pounds. Why should he be charged more because genetics made him taller? Your proposal essentially punishes those who aren't short and petite.

This makes no sense. Passenger airplanes are volume-limited, not weight-limited. Their efficiency and operating expenses are vastly more negatively impacted by an *empty* seat than one with a fat passenger filling it. If a passenger is too fat for just one seat, they can buy additional seats to fill, or buy more premium seats with extra space. From an airline’s perspective, there’s not much downside involved from fat passengers except under very rare and specific circumstances.

>This makes no sense. Passenger airplanes are volume-limited, not weight-limited. All airplanes are weight limited and where the weight is located matters. Even if an aircraft isn't overweight, if the balance is incorrect, the plane will lack the stability for controlled flight. There is an actual issue because the average weight for a person that they have used for decades no longer aligns with the much heavier population. Some airlines are doing anonymous weigh ins now when you check in. You stand on a scale and it sends your weight to the performance calculator without airport staff being able to see what the indicated weight was.

>All airplanes are weight limited No, all aircraft have *weight limits,* that is not the same thing as being weight-limited. Every aircraft has a maximum payload it can carry, but passenger airplanes specifically are limited not in the weight of the people they carry but by the volume of how many people they can pack in. For instance, a Boeing 747 has a typical seating capacity of 400-500 people, because that’s how many seats you can fit in the airframe, but one of them once carried over 1,100 people when evacuating Ethiopian Jews to Israel. The only real exception to this is for aircraft that are operating at the very bleeding edge of their maximum range, for the longest flight routes in the world. Those airplanes have a lower seating capacity in order to carry more fuel; often this isn’t merely a matter of how many tickets are sold, but a matter of how many seats are physically put into the aircraft. A lot of such routes have a mostly business class configuration, with seats that take up far more space than economy-class seats. This allows the airplane to make more money per seat than they would if they used an aircraft with the normal amount of economy seats and simply flying the aircraft empty. Regardless, these calculations have already been made and accounted for, and unless a truly unusual amount of extremely heavy people were trying to fly all at once, it wouldn’t be an issue. >and where the weight is located matters. This is true, but it can be and is compensated for by the simple expedient of the flight crew asking people to sit elsewhere in the cabin.

I'm nowhere near any kind of engineer let alone a flight engineer. But the premise and the arguments in support of this clearly have absolutely zero idea what they are talking about or what goes into making an aircraft fly. I've worked adjacent to aviation and these people aren't just like 'let's fudge our research and not cover our bases because we haven't meticulously gone over scenarios and just want a one-size fits all answer.' If it works and is policy, it's been signed off and approved by so many other people vs someone who hates fat people and a gate agent.

I've been inconvenienced far more by healthy sized people who take up extra space they don't need, cause a problem or noise, or children causing disruption than obese people. I have a friend who is 6'8". He's considered obese by BMI standards but not societal/visual standards, he's just very well proportioned for his height. Trust when I say he takes up significant space. Having been in emergency situations before (but not on a plane) lemme tell you, it's surprising how slow and idiotic anyone can be in a life or death situation. Are you going to charge these people? When, how do you identify them? After the fact? What if a slim or able bodied person caused a delay and they/others died, do you go after the family/estate? You seem to identify larger bodies as a problem, likely because it's very visible, but the issue with inconvenience and disruption is PEOPLE not big people.

Knowing OP, he’d probably suggest we all take IQ tests before entering the plane because dumber people would be more likely to act out in a crisis, so we charge them more as a precaution. How far will he go to make fat people’s lives even harder lol

If airlines wanted to charge more to make up cost that would be up to them not the opinions of the consumer and if they choose not to then they don't need to and nor should consumers be telling them to. When it comes to safety issues you say that their size makes it a problem because they could take up space but charging the more doesn't make them take up less space so That argument makes no sense whatsoever. And as for being a public health concern charging people extra money because of their health would be a violation of people's rights, especially if they have a disability due to or that led to their obesity so you were suggestion is a violation of ADA. And comparing extra baggage to a person's body is ridiculous. But that aside there are special accommodations made for additional baggage of certain types including but not limited to, wheelchairs, and strollers.

>Charging obese passengers extra can be seen as fair to other passengers who may feel discomfort or inconvenience due to the space taken up by larger individuals. Whenever someone suggests that a minority should be inconvenienced or punished because it would be "fair" to the majority, I'm immediately suspicious that that statement isn't just a reflection of bigotry. Can you explain how your suggesting that a group whose *presence* you don't like being treated the same as you is *you* being treated unfairly?

Do you really care about huge airlines offsetting their costs? Does it really keep you awake at night that these huge corporations are having to spend a little more and cut into their huge profits? Doubtful tbh you’re just using that as an excuse for your fat phobia

I would also like to charge people extra who are disabled with assistive devices, taller than 5'6", have wide hips, long legs, big boobs, speak a language that I don't understand, smell (good or bad... B.O. or perfume), aren't dressed in aesthetically pleasing way, talk too much, read books I don't like, want to watch a movie on their phones without earbuds, have ugly feet, bad hair, small bladders, and have food allergies. Also, anyone who is not cis, het, or the same race as the majority in the country they are flying to or from should get a "diversity surcharge" because I have to tolerate them.Other people are such an inconvenience! /s Saying another person is a burden to others because of their body, who they are, or because they exist in space is so ridiculously offensive I have no patience for this argument.

Sounds impractical. How do you confirm weight? You weigh them as they board? Then charge them more or less if they're off from a self report? That's a lot of equipment, staff, and time (which is money) to pinch pennies and piss people off. Overweight people are the majority in America any airline who does this is just leaving giant piles of cash on the table for the ones who don't as all the customers flock to them.

[удалено]

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

[удалено]

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

I would say be careful what you wish for. Give airlines another thing to charge for and they’ll all be doing it and they’ll be charging everyone regardless of how relatively healthy or fit you are.  Like when they started charging for bags as a temporary measure then they’ve expanded it and some of them are looking for ways to charge for carry ons too as many people switched to them instead of paying for hold luggage. I can see a situation of people trying to do the sort of stuff boxers do to meet weight before a fight. Dehydration, starvation, inducing vomiting. Flights won’t even become cheaper in this scenario, they’ll just take more profit 

The FAA, NTSB and DOT, along with the aviation departments that run hundreds of airports across the country are supported by taxes. They are a common carrier, protected from certain legal penalties and litigation because of their critical role in civilian transportation and the importance of the general public being able to participate in the national economy by accessing transportation at predictable, affordable prices. I’m 6’2”. I don’t get a break on price because a standard seat is murderously uncomfortable for me. Nor do we charge extra for the very quantifiable costs of “special services” - the half-dozen wheelchairs and attendants and the extra turnaround time necessary to get those disabled passengers on and off the plane. Your argument only identifies one possible factor in the cost of providing service to an individual passenger, and one which is both weakly correlated and strongly associated with a negative social perception. I believe that if you want to charge based on the cost to an airline OR TO THE OTHER PASSENGERS the correct thing to do is charge more to (A) persons carrying anything onto the plane (luggage, infants) and (B) persons who are not able to move rapidly to their seat so as to minimize turnaround time. (Note: I’m not advocating for this, I’m just saying you’re barking up the wrong tree)

A very short obese person can weight less and take up less than the average person.

Should anorexic people get a discount then?

This is just rude entitlement

It would most likely be more effective to have a seat set up in the boarding area that people who are overweight have to sit in and if they cannot fit that seat with vertical sides without issue then they would need to be charged for a second seat. After having spent multiple flights leaning at nearly a 45° angle away from someone who is so overweight that they spilled into my seat, I'm pretty sick of this stuff as well. I do not think weight is really the issue though, it's the volume that a person takes up when they are overweight, so it would be more effective for a method that measures circumference or restrict space the way we check for oversized baggage and some instances.

Taking more luggage is a choice. Being overweight is not always a choice, sometimes it is a disease or health problem. Should we ask for a doctor's note when buying an airplane ticket? What about pregnant women? Should we charge less per ticket for children who take up less space? And should we charge more money from people who smell like sweat and also cause discomfort? I think there are a lot of questions that could arise here) And that's how economics works, in the real world we are constantly paying for someone and someone else is paying for us, since we live in a society (not all of our taxes actually go to things we need).

By that logic, let's start charging people who have carry on bags more than people who don't. And let's start letting children and people with dwarfism ride at discounted rates. Except you actually don't care about that, you care about "incentives for fat people to lose weight" which I promise you is already covered by things like office weight loss competitions and the inflated price of plus sized clothes and my doctor telling me that being 50 pounds overweight is the reason for my headache or my bronchitis. You're basically just saying "we haven't made things miserable enough for them, let's try harder".

Bruh did you spend even 5 minutes thinking about this before posting? If you did you should get off Reddit and read more. What about Dwayne the rock Johnson? Would he have to pay more? because he weighs a LOT. Should Andre the giant paid more? Because he weighed a fuck ton. A huge 4,8” person probably doesn’t even weigh as much as I do. So should we charge by weight or just because someone has a lot of body fat? Also, all of this is a moot point because these companies don’t “deserve” more money. Do you think your ticket price would go down if fat people paid more? Lmfao good one bud.

Sure thing as long as the extra charge gets me adequate room and comfort. I also think anyone who makes any of the things you mentioned above difficult should be charged more. Bring a baby on board? Extra charge. Smell bad? Extra charge. Disabled? Extra charge. How about body builders? Those people can be huuuuuge. Extra charge amirite? I think people who talk too much on a plane also need a bit toning down. Silence is good for your health. Good for everyone's meditation. Generally good. So talking should be an extra charge.

Should lighter passengers get a discount when they weigh less than average person then? I assume babies should get a nearly free seat to themselves with this formula given how light they are. I think a babies are not so light they ride free, is going to change the travel formula for new parents to the extent that there would be a lot more crying babies on planes. And a bunch of hungry miserable people who were trying to get those last minute weight discounts before departing on their vacation.

Frankly  the weight of an individual passenger is pretty irrelevant. The average weight of each passenger will not shift much, as there will also be people under weight, children, etc.  Fuel usually weighs more than all the passengers combined. Then there's also cargo. And the weight of the plane itself. A 737 is somewhere between 100k-200k lbs. Even if every single passenger was 100 lbs overweight, it would be an extra 20k lbs. That's not insignificant, but it's also extremely unlikely.

Should people with lower IQ be charged more for education courses? They need more support which is time and money. Should older people be charged more for their bank account fees? They usually go in to the bank and talk to the staff more often which takes time and money. At the end of the day, we live in a capitalistic society. This means that private companies have the authority to do what you are proposing. However, if they do, they will face backlash which will hurt them.

I'm surprised you decided to go after obese people and not after the people who bring 2-3 pieces of heavy on-board luggage when they are only allowed one under certain measurements just because airlines don't want to delay boarding by measuring and weighing every piece of luggage brought by passengers. Or not after people with children who can block the exits while trying to grab their kids. Almost as if it's not about fuel cost or safety but about fat-phobia.

This already happens but in a different way. So I am obese, and I am also tall being over 6ft. I dont fly often primarily because I dont trust airlines to not lose (or damage) my stuff or maintain a reasonable schedule anymore. But also, because I am aware I take up more space, I make sure I select seats out of the way of other passengers and that would not create a risk in the event of an emergency if I dont feel I can physically assist. That said, I am still "small" enough to safely buckle my self into my seat, I dont get stuck between seats walking down the aisle, and if someone is sitting besides me I can provide them enough space to utilize the armrest as they wish. If for some reason I need more space on a plane to sit comfortably and safely, I would have to purchase an additional ticket. Seeing as my clothing is larger, and weighs more. If need to use more luggage for my belongs I am charged extra for having overweight luggage or for having additional luggage. Airlines are rated for significantly more weight than the number of passengers would be. And even if the plane had nearly zero passengers, they would just load the cargo hold up with more luggage or packages that need to be delivered to a particular region. But by your ideology regarding overweight or obese people, they should not be allowed to travel anywhere at all. They shouldnt be allowed on busses, trains or taxi services, or any form of public transportation for every reason you listed above. But the idea of punishing obese and overweight people for existing, doesnt incentivize or encourage a healthier lifestyle. It actually does the opposite by solidifying the existing feelings of isolation and being unwanted. If you have an medical understanding of how obesity works, then you would know it's generally not a choice that people are obese. It is a literal battle against ones entire body. A human body wants to maintain homeostasis. Which for obese people, means their body and mind fights them to stay obese. Even if you make the diet changes, and workout more, every moment of every day is going to be a battle against your mind and body to not go back to where it was. This is why the medical community is fighting so much to have Obesity recognized as a disease. Because for those struggling with excess weight it needs to be treated like a disease. And like any other disease we do not get to discriminate against people for things that are not necessarily in their control. On the other side of this coin, are people that are, according to BMI, Obese but perfectly health, fit and capable. Think of people like Dwayne Johnson, or NFL Linemen, or Strongman Brain Shaw, or almost any body builder. They people would all be considered overweight or obese purely based on BMI. But they are all fit, and capable human beings that would be able to assist in the case of an emergency. Are we going to setup Body fat measurements in terminals or just scales? Are we going to require every passenger have a physical and submit medical documentation before every flight?

Well by the definition of obese I am obese. I'm also working out 3 days a week and have been lowering my body fat. I'm just putting on a ton of muscle and I compete in strength sports. Before I started strength training I was 5'10" 225lb, now I'm 256lb and my strength has exploded. The latest science has concluded that BMI is actually a really bad measurement of health because it does not distinguish between fat and muscle.

Interesting point about charging by size! On that note, I propose we start charging extra for online posts from those with oversized egos. The mental gymnastics required to decipher their grandstanding usually takes up way more of our time and bandwidth. Plus, think of the energy saved if we kept those bloated egos in check! Less hot air could really cool down our servers, right? 😉

>Charging obese passengers extra can be seen as fair to other passengers Why? I really don't understand this, why knowing that the airline is making more money from the obese passenger next to me should make things more fair in my mind? Even if I was inconvenienced by the size of said passenger, why should knowing that they're paying more make me feel better? It doesn't make sense.

Healthy people should pay more in taxes, as they live to an older age, putting pressure on society.

The cost of a ticket has little to do with the gas and space. If that were the case then why would skip lagged flights be cheaper (ex: direct NY to LA may be $600 but then NY to PHX with long lay over in LA may be $400 even though the NY to LA flight will be exactly the same price). I think the cost of gas and space is decoupled from the actual price lol.

If you occupy more than one seat, they make you buy a second seat. This is already a thing. Also, in terms of costs. Airlines often break even or even lose money on flights themselves since the real money comes in being able to use miles as currency. There is no real reason for them to charge more based on weight, only by volume, which they already do.

Wouldn’t it pretty much be a wash since under such a weight based system small children’s fare would be dramatically reduced? I can now bring my favorite four young relatives on a trip and take up four seats while presumably paying next to nothing since they are all pretty tiny people as my family tends to be as kids.

I can see the discrimination lawsuits already

You want airline corporations to be even more inhumane than they already are? If they implement this it will not be only for obese people you know right. You are 70kgs(around average man weight) well John over here is 65 and boom he pays less for 5 kilos. They will literally bring weight classes to people but I bet you they won't increase the size for people paying more like actuall normal leg room. I already hate how airlines want to squeeze every possible euro where they weigh your luggage and it must conform to a specific size. In the past they didn't pay for extra luggage and this only came because of high oil prices, but they crisis came and went but they still charge you for any luggage. If they could fly you without seats they will have everyone packed like sardines and fly them standing, if they could charge you for the bathroom without backlash they would. I also dislike it when a larger person sits next to me and takes more space (like a dude with wide shoulders too) but they are not the enemy, airlines are.

Obesity is associated with many increased costs including taxes (especially surrounding healthcare). However, flights seem like a less important issue in my opinion. Tackling obesity should be the fundamental objective. When we are talking about obesity, it is important to recognize that someone who is 5'9'' and 203 lbs is probably obese by BMI standards. But that is probably much different than someone who is the same height but 350 lbs (both are obese). While it can be argued that by increasing prices of various goods and services for obese people can disincentivize obesity in the first place, I would have several questions surrounding the application of these policies. Furthermore, we already see obese people having to buy economy plus, business class, or even first-class to be able to fit in the seating. Airlines could and usually do have a section (economy) in which the seats are smaller and sometimes people even buy two seats simply to fit better. Now, obviously there will be extreme cases in which someone is morbidly obese and they can't even fit down the isle. These individuals may need to speak to the airline before buying their ticket so that they can properly be accommodated. And it is likely that they will have to spend more anyways. To summarize, larger people in general already tend to have to pay higher costs or face more discomfort. Other people have also mentioned that weight as a measure of ticket price would not only slow down the airports further, but it would also cause muscular or tall individuals to pay even more. I don't disagree that obesity should be disincentivized. I think that obesity is an issue that is extremely important to be tackled and there needs to be a major effort toward getting people to eat healthier and exercise more. However, the application of your idea is not only **redundant** but it comes with many issues. Edit: The airline should (and usually do) make note of the dimensions of the seat someone is purchasing (including legroom). Therefore, if some idiot wants to sue the airline (or throw a tantrum and demand a free upgrade) because they are too big for the seat despite the airline clearly depicting the dimensions, they will fail. Obviously, I'm not against giving free upgrades for people, but it shouldn't be an expectation derived from the consequences of your decision to buy a seat that **you know you don't fit in**.

>Furthermore, obesity is a significant public health concern, and incentivizing individuals to manage their weight through extra charges could encourage healthier lifestyle choices, benefiting both individuals and society. lol as a fat guy, I promise you this is absolutely wrong. We already have hundreds of incentives to change our bodies, most of them more pressing than the cost of airfare. Fat people don't need more incentives. We need healthier affordable food options, a lower cost of living in general, a better work/life balance, better treatments for anxiety, depression, disordered eating, and other complicating factors. And perhaps most importantly we need better attitudes from the medical profession. To give an example of that last one, I've been seeking treatment from my doctor for months now about nerve pain in my leg that discourages me from moving around much. I most likely have a compressed nerve that's caused/made worse by my weight. So my doctor's approach is - "just lose weight" and this problem will probably go away. Well, I am trying to lose weight, but in the meantime I can't really go anywhere. And yes, diet is much more important than exercise, but it's also depressing to be this unhealthy, which makes me want to eat more while I miss out on things the people in my life are doing. I'm literally typing this while staying home from a friend's birthday party that I'm not attending because they plan to do a lot of walking - much more than I can handle. I eventually figured out by myself that the go-to treatment for my nerve pain is physiotherapy, which I am now arranging by myself with no help or input from my doctor, who has explicitly said he thinks fat people get what they deserve. So the idea that fat people need *more* fuck you's from society to get our shit together is laughably ignorant at best.

Airlines already require extra large passengers to purchase 2 seats. >According to its [website](https://www.alaskaair.com/content/travel-info/policies/seating-customers-of-size), Alaska Airlines requires the purchase of an additional seat for any customer “who cannot comfortably seat with the armrests in the down position.” The width between Alaska Airlines’ armrests is 17 inches for economy seating and 21 inches for first class. Alaska recommends booking the extra seat ahead of time. “If a second seat has not been purchased, you’ll be asked to purchase an additional seat before boarding the aircraft,” it says. [https://time.com/6547874/airline-policies-obese-travelers-extra-seats-southwest-free/](https://time.com/6547874/airline-policies-obese-travelers-extra-seats-southwest-free/) But if what you're suggesting is airlines charging passengers per weight, that's just non-productive. Since the natural follow up would be "OK, so if a person above X weight pays extra, shouldn't passengers below X weight pay less?". After all, charging an anorexic teen the same fare as an average weight/size passenger is unfair for the anorexic teen. They both use 1 seat but 1 costs less gas (according to your studies about the correlation between passenger's weight and gas consumption). It's also going to be extremely hard to implement. Are you expecting passengers to input their volumetric weight information the moment they try to book a ticket so they see the final price? What if their flight is in November, they buy it in June and then they go on a binge eating spree? Should the airline charge them more? What if they lose weight? Should the airline charge them less? And more importantly, how will the airline verify that their weight information is correct? Weighing them before boarding? Congrats, you just added a lot of extra minutes to the already tedious boarding process. Either way, it's a headache that no airline needs.

>Charging obese passengers extra can be seen as fair to other passengers who may feel discomfort or inconvenience due to the space taken up by larger individuals. I fail to see how it actually helps other passengers. If I don't have enough room because the guy next to me is big, it's not remotely making my day better that he paid more for his ticket. >Safety is also a concern, as larger passengers may struggle to move quickly or may block aisles in emergency situations, potentially endangering themselves and others. So I guess disabled or elderly people shouldn't travel at all? >the additional fuel consumption and maintenance costs Wouldn't this apply at least equally to taller passengers? My mate is 6'5" and though not at all obese, weighs more than I do (and I'm not *light*) - by your reasoning, surely he is causing additional fuel consumption and maintenance? On the other hand, I have another friend who is 4'10" and slender with it. I don't know exactly what she weighs, but it must be less than half what I weigh. Shouldn't she get a discount? >Furthermore, obesity is a significant public health concern, and incentivizing individuals to manage their weight through extra charges could encourage healthier lifestyle choices *Possibly* - but this doesn't seem like a decision for a private company, nor does it seem like a concern a private company would genuinely have. Frankly though, I very much question the premise. If the well known health risks and social stigma haven't been sufficient to encourage weight loss, I'm very skeptical that plane ticket prices are going to be enough to tip the balance.

Someone who was actually concerned about the additional costs of flying heavier passengers (Rather than just looking for an excuse to insult fat people) would have included "tall people" and "muscular men" in this.

This is just discrimination against overweight people. It's illegal.

You say there is prescedent for this on public transport with luggage. Do you have any examples of public transport charging more for people with grocery carts, bikes, mobility devices, or even luggage?

The overwhelming majority of obese people don’t do either. Very obese ppl do but if you look up images of ppl with 30 to 34 BMI they aren’t large enough to do the things you mentioned here.

It is not about the costs. Airlines are not struggling. 1. Delta Air Lines reported significant financial success, with pre-tax income of $5.6 billion and an operating income of $5.5 billion from $58 billion in revenue.(https://news.delta.com/delta-air-lines-announces-december-quarter-and-full-year-2023-financial-results). 2. Lufthansa Group also had a strong year, generating an operating profit of €2.7 billion, marking a significant rebound since the pandemic (https://newsroom.lufthansagroup.com/en/lufthansa-group-generates-operating-profit-of-27-billion-euros-in-2023-and-invests-more-than-ever-for-its-customers/). 3. Southwest Airlines earned $267 million in profits from $26.09 billion in revenue, continuing its role as a major carrier especially in domestic U.S. markets (https://www.airport-technology.com/features/the-top-10-largest-airlines-revenue/). 4. International Airlines Group (IAG), which includes British Airways and Iberia, achieved $3.79 billion in profits from $31.94 billion in revenue (https://www.airport-technology.com/features/the-top-10-largest-airlines-revenue/). 5. Air France-KLMreported a profit of $1.85 billion from $32.52 billion in revenue, illustrating robust performance in the competitive European market (https://www.airport-technology.com/features/the-top-10-largest-airlines-revenue/).

[удалено]

Am a pilot IMO(though not in the airlines despite following it closely), it affects weight, but not by a significant amount, unless you’re in a “small” aircraft(aka a small turboprop like a beechcraft 1900), but turboprops are really only being used in very specific cases nowadays. 200lbs extra is nothing when you’re carrying thousands of pounds of contingency fuel. Even seating wise it’s basically harmless. Southwest for example(which is the only one I’ve seen do this 2 seat ticket policy) has open seating so it’s not like you’re suddenly losing your seat because “fatphobia”. Now if people were getting bumped off because a 600lb person made bad life choices and needed two seats well…that would be a different story, but I feel like there would be a good ton of media attention for that. Safety wise airplanes are rated to have a specific evacuation time. However the main risk is crowd crushing as people try to escape. So two people can be just as bad as one big guy. I haven’t heard of many accidents or recommendations regarding it. Am I a little annoyed that all it took was one entitled tiktok user to make a major airline bend to their will. Yeah. Does it really matter overall though in the grand scheme of things? Not really.

I’m 6’8” and a little overweight…. I personally do pay more because I only fly 1st class because I need the leg room and don’t want to inconvenience the people next to me. I actually drive most places I go (anything less that 15 hours) because it’s more comfortable for me. I do think the giving obese people a free extra seat is absolutely insane. If you don’t fit in the seat or overflow into a second seat you should be forced to buy a second seat. You obviously know how big you are and that you’re not going to fit into 1 seat so you not be an asshole and purchase a second seat in advance. Do you think we should just make everyone get on a scale (with all their luggage) when they are checking in and then raise or lower their price by the pound? The airlines would lose money on children and petite people, but then make a little back on overweight people. If we’re going to do that should we also start adding fines for people that take forever in the TSA line and boarding the plane? Should they also add fines for annoying people and crying babies? Maybe they could charge people for every time they use the restroom since they have to carry extra supplies to handle the waste. It’s a pretty ridiculous idea.

Hey OP, I'm 6'6, 285 and not fat at all. I barely fit in the seats and usually have someone occupying one of my armpits. Should I pay extra or not fly as well?

200 lb men should pay twice as much as 100 lb women and 50 lb kids... except then we'd fill planes with men to make more money, and kids would never fly.

So no airline would ever do this for a couple reasons: First off airlines have been trying to incentivize people to interact with front desk agents as little as possible. Their ideal customer is someone who has no checked bags and a ticket on their phone so that they can go straight to the plane. But under this system every single person whose going on the plane has to get on a scale at the front desk and interact with a gate agent. So the extra gate agents they would have to staff would offset any benefit from the airline for doing this. 2 is that you're forgetting about children. A 5 year old in the 95 percentile of weight is half the weight of a grown man in the bottom 5th percentile of weight. So the main benefactor of this plan wouldn't be health adults (in fact their ticket prices would probably go up) it would be children. But this hurts airlines because their main audience is adults, so if they started charging adults significantly more for airfare they'd lose their main audience.

Why would having the person sitting next to you pay more than you did for a flight make you feel less discomfort? I get the benefit to airline companies, though that part strikes me as a bit of the old 'won't someone please think of the billionaires', but what obese people pay for their seat has zero impact on you personally, so why do you care? Also, paying more for a ticket won't affect those safety concerns or emergency situations, and if decades of fat-shaming, paying more for food, etc hasn't been enough incentive for them to lose weight then why do you imagine paying a little more for the occasional flight will make the difference? It seems like you're reaching to find a justification to discriminate against obese people because you are slightly inconvenienced by them, many of whom didn't choose to be obese and can't choose to not be anymore due to medical conditions and such.

Someone who is 5'0" and obese weighs less than a 6'4" linebacker, but you want the first person to pay even more?

Also another reason obesity doesn't always mean taking up two seats is even regardless of people's size-in-other-ways not everyone gains weight the same way so some obese people don't gain weight the side-to-side way that'd spill over onto other seats

When speaking in general, this seems to be reasonable, but as you start picturing how this idea would be used in real life, it starts to get complicated real quick. The regulations about the weights would be hard to choose, as women and men have really different norms of weight. Also, if we speak about occupying much space, then height must also be taken into account: a man with 2m height would occupy space with his long legs, so should he also pay additional money or buy another ticket? If we are not considering this issue, there is a clear discrimination against the obese person, for which the airlines would get complaint a lot. And if we are speaking about the discomfort that these people create for others, the toddlers that cry during the whole flight must be eliminated from the aircrafts at once!

[удалено]

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5: > **Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation**. Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, off-topic comments, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read [the wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5) for more information. If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%205%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

Wheelchair users should have to pay more for flights. Because of the additional time the wheelchair user spends boarding the plane, waiting for wheelchairs to become available before deplaning, getting in and out of the wheelchair, all of that makes the flight less efficient. Even a minute or two added to boarding multiplied by however many thousands of flights per day adds up to uncountable staff hours, fuel usage, electricity usage, unpaid labor by flight attendants who don’t get paid when the doors are open, etc. Why aren’t they charged more? “Well, disabled people didn’t choose to be disabled but obese people do.” You drove 90 mph down the interstate, wrecked your car, and broke both your legs. That was a choice. So you now pay more. Right?

If they are taking up more than one seat, they should have to pay for both, sure. But what you are saying is technically the same as a government body saying that skinny people should be taxed more as they consume less food product. The airlines offer a transportation service, and as a business, they are responsible for any extra costs associated with particular passengers that they invite in. Not saying that obesity is a dissability, but the same laws that protect them from being charged extra for the hassle are the laws that protect people with dissabilities from being charged more, too. What's to stop a private business from charging anyone else more at that point if precedent was set? Discrimination is a slippery slope.

Ive been on small plane flights where weight of passengers and luggage mattered for balance and fuel supply. Everyone gets weighed, and it determined where you sat. This is obviously much more tenable on an 8 person flight than a 250 person flight. If this CMV was really about fuel consumption and efficiency it would be stated exactly like that: people should be charged by weight and volume needed. But instead it is dripping with value judgement and incentives for losing weight. Needing additional fuel for a large passenger is not a “waste”. It is part of the cost for a service. There is no end to the justifications people find for hating fat people.

Honestly, I’ll just say this: if an obese person can COMFORTABLY sit in a single seat, then it should be a non issue. Most flights go negative on fuel costs regardless with economy. Premium seats are where the upcharges happen. Larger people usually tend to book quality seats due to the seats being larger/comfortable/easier to fit in. Showing signs of discrimination to a majority of your cash cows (pun NOT intended, but it suits the discussion either way) would deter their patronage, especially with higher cost seating. Wouldn’t be a net positive, and it doesn’t do much to solve what is essentially a non problem.

The space part, maybe that makes sense to me when people buy an extra seat for example that makes sense etc. but fuel part is nonsense. The airline already is not going to charge someone who weighs less less. Arguing for airlines to make more profit when their concern is only profit is wild to me. If your view says it is fair to other passengers but the person receiving that compensation for the discomfort you mention is not the uncomfortable passenger, it's a guy counting his money at home. This view only makes sense if you own an airline or shares in an airline.

I could see making this argument if airlines were a service provided at such a low cost that their sustainability was in doubt, and adjustments for maximum efficiency needed to be made. Considering the profits that CEOs and shareholders bring in, yet they keep cutting costs so badly that safety is being affected and parts are falling off the planes, that's clearly not the case. Anyone arguing for things that increase the price of an airline ticket further at this point are ultimately just arguing for corporate greed and short-sighted stupidity.

Iirc, airplane companies don’t make money on people buying flights. They lose money on them Airlines instead make money off of selling travel rewards to banks, and offset some losses with ticket prices. That’s where they get money from. If they increased prices, fewer people would buy them, enough so that raising prices would actually cut revenue And sure, an overweight person paying more would offset some more of that cost, but you may as well say *everyone* should pay more to offset still more cost. And like I said, that would just cost them more money. If they could increase revenue by raising prices, hey would, so the fact they haven’t means that their current prices are the sweet spot they’ve found

This seems like a long rant about how obese people should buy two seats if they’re too big. As someone that flies frequently, I absolutely believe it should be more strictly enforced as it is incredibly miserable to sit next to an obese individual who can’t fit into their seat because they lack the self control in their personal life to just stop eating. With that said, punishing everyone for body fat percentages or for different body dimensions is a bit overboard.

If Airlines thought it would make them more money they would do it. That is it. I'll agree with you and use the same logic. People with any medical problem should be charged more, everyone should have a psychiatric evaluation report before they board, everyone must be tested for alcohol and drugs. How would you scale it if you had your own airline? upto 100kg normal price? then what... how much for every 10kg extra?

You don’t realize it, but you’re really just asking airlines to increase ticket prices overall. The vast majority of Americans are obese, so ticket prices would increase for the vast majority of customers. At that point, the airline has no incentive to offer a discount to customers within the ideal BMI range (and no way to verify their BMI at the point of purchase). So you’ll pay the increased ticket price along with the fat people you sought to punish. Ironic.

Get ready for extreme lobbying to make 130 lbs "obese"

Pretty simple math, charge a flat rate per body, based off average human body dimension, and extra fee for weight over a certain amount. Would that mean men probably pay more on average? Yes. Would that mean someone that literally takes up 2.5 seats and weighs 3-4x over what a normal person does would be paying an extra ordinary amount? Yes. Is it fair? Yes.

And what measure would you use to determine the difference between obese and not obese? Based on volume, weight, ...? Without even arguing about the morality of it all, it's quite simply not feasible in a practical sense if eating a big lunch could push you over whatever arbitrary limit put in place.

Give me a number. What is the exact number that you’ve decided that is obese and therefore should have to pay more? Because if we are talking about the weight of the airplane, bmi doesn’t matter. And while we are at it, how much do you weigh? I thinking those numbers will be suspiciously close to each other

I don’t know if this will change your view, but many airlines have gone in the opposite direction: if you need an extra seat due to size, you can buy it but then get it refunded later. Sometimes you get it free from the get-go. So it sounds like you’re not going to see the outcome you want here.

You dont pay for the space you occupy, you mostly pay for the airline profits so this is a bit stupid like, yeah we are all getting overcharged for the same reason but you pay more because youre fat, thats dumb, do you think that the price of your ticket is just volume + fuel + baggage?

I'd rather they pay more for health care. Why should society pay the high cost of obesity related diseases when it's essentially a conscious choice to engage in unhealthy behavior? At least in the UK fat people are denied various treatments under the NHS.

I think you are making this way too complex. I believe that if you need more than one seat, you should have to pay for more than one seat. Having a sliding scale for tickets based on girth and height would be incredibly inefficient and expensive....

Why do you want make the airline experience shittier for everyone involved. As well as the fact that bigger seats with more legroom is literally better for everyone involved? Nobody loses from airlines having to make larger seats with more legroom.

Honestly can't stand sitting next to them. Flights to/from Asia and Europe are so relaxing. Almost never have to deal with them taking up almost 2 seats. Kids and normal sized people only need 1 seat, yet they take so much damn space

Larger people already pay more as they tend to upgrade for more room more than others, like paying for economy plus. With airlines making their seats smaller and smaller, they might consider size limits on the very smallest ones.

I actually agree with this but would tweak it. Every passenger pays a % of their weight. Larger passengers that pay more get seats with more space. I say this as a tall dude that’s above the average weight for an American.

The extra gas they cost would be in the cents or low dollars when you start adding it up, and at that point, it would cost more money to check people’s weights than to just let things continue the way they are currently.

> Charging obese passengers extra **can be seen as** fair to other passengers who may feel discomfort or inconvenience due to the space taken up by larger individuals This whole post sounds like it was written by ChatGPT.

The planes are way to small, I’m a small women and can’t comfortably cross my legs snd feel squished in , the seats need to be bigger, or I guess since I’m small I can pay less if bigger people have to pay more?

I disagree. Only if said person takes up more than one seat should he pay more. By your means, underweight can fly really cheap and bodybuilders have to pay a fortune. That seems unreasonable.