Should fat people pay more for clothing?

[Orby]

They kind of already do, as someone who worked in retail for many many years in the UK 'larger' sizes were never stocked at our store you would have to order them, which in turn would cost more anyway.

[Deleted]

Cloth = $

More Cloth = +$

Except the $ of that cloth has nothing to do with what your jeans end up costing. XXXS or XXXL - doesn't matter. The cost of production is a fraction of the retail cost.

[tikcol]

Except the $ of that cloth has nothing to do with what your jeans end up costing. XXXS or XXXL - doesn't matter. The cost of production is a fraction of the retail cost.

Cloth = $

More Cloth = +$

There's nothing wrong with what I said. Stop mental gymnastics and accept a simple fact.

[Deleted]

The textile also has to be more durable, making it even more expensive.

[Guyv3r]

If the same thing happens to kids clothes... I regularly see pairs of sneakers for babies about 80% smaller in size compared to an adults foot only costing 20% less..

[Deleted]

in the UK companies are not allowed to charge more for clothing articles of different sizes, a shirt sized S must cost the same as a shirt sized XL if it is the same article of clothing. Some companies make clothes in a specific size range and charge more. but they are not allowed to charge different amounts based on size. this goes for shoes, underwear etc.

This is also why Bras with large cup sizes dont get any fancy looking design and are usually plain as it costs to much to make fancy looking bras with big cups.

[Flipo]

Big (heuheu) controversy going on about a London retailer charging people more for + size clothing.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/16/w...k-fat-tax.html

The idea is pretty simple:
Bigger size = more fabric
Bigger size = more sitches
Bigger size = smaller demand = more expensive production

Do you think this is fair? From an economical point of view it kinda is. But people are calling it a "Fat shaming tax" already.
Thoughts?

its a nice analysis, have a like. Fat people should provide more money for clothing.

[Ryme]

Don't they already?

[onesBronson]

I'm fat and I already pay more for my clothes, but its no big deal since I don't need a lot of them to begin with. I wear a uniform to my job, and they pay for everything I need, outside of work I chill at home mostly so I have little reason to buy new clothes all the time.

[Deleted]

Just ask the women who do the work in bangladesh. I'm sure the disturbed look on their faces will be awesome. The insignificance thing in front of all the horror that is connected to this topic. Priceless ignorance. As if Nero while burning Rome asked the fleeing half dead Citizens if they would be ok with higher taxes... Hahahaha.

[Intuitive]

There should most definitely be a fat tax. Plus, it's another incentive for them to lose weight.

Look, move and feel healthier as well as save extra money? Win, win, win.

[Najnaj]

Except the $ of that cloth has nothing to do with what your jeans end up costing. XXXS or XXXL - doesn't matter. The cost of production is a fraction of the retail cost.

This is incorrect for most clothes and irrelevant for virtually all. Besides luxury brands, production is a major part of the end cost over shadowed only by the retail markup. Clothes are marked up by percent so 10 bucks of production becomes anywhere from 20 to 40 bucks retail depending on producer/retailer additions, 20 bucks becomes 40 to 80.

Also, someone is going to pay for that extra production cost. I fail to see why it should be thin people.

[aeuhe4yxzhds]

Sure, if tall men earn more than manlets and women. Surely thats fine since tall men require more food and material for their cloths and shoes?


Thats what you are pushing for

[Halyon]

To be honest, its why they generally don't in high street stores and larger brands because it would be cited as punishing people for not conforming to size standards whether for the other array of genetics like height, bust thyroid, muscle mass, whatever that need to address it. And they would easily get targeted. You can't on the spot denote someone being healthy or not, health is individual to the person by genetics and opinion too. We all have different bodies and variants, how the hell do you pigeon hole it? And evaluate that person right the second they buy it? And on top of that... Govern taste? Hahaha. It's a mindfield.

But the issue as I said before, when you bulk up you need bigger clothing which to no surprise, some of these people need XL or XXL. Which fat people need also, in the end you're now punishing people for being healthy. I personally, am working out, my hips and thighs are expanding so rather than be a size 12 UK, I need size 14. Should I be expected to pay more when I'm actually being healthy? Can you tell someone from looking at them they go gym? Currently I don't because I'm still losing fat and converting to lean mass.
Again, it gets super hairy then. You start devaluing health and screw other systems up.

By and large tax on clothes is silly because well we need to wear clothing, here we use VAT already which is nonsense when you think about it... We're lawfully expected to wear clothing... Digressing, being drastic in pricing range from XS to XL is quite saddening and ignorant. You don't need a larger bottle of soda, you do for clothing. Especially for myself, going gym 3 times a week, I can't even do the zip up in some of my smaller jeans because I'm getting muscle around my bum. Granted I'm trying to enhance an hourglass figure but shouldn't I be able to enjoy being healthy how I choose?

Fortunately enough they are already conscious of that fact. And yeah I mean, hitting people in clothing further with more tax is ridiculous, we already have taxation here to tackle obesity and fat which is sugar tax, where these people will dabble in.
What they do now, with spreading the production expense cost across the sizing board is better and less aggro too with victimisation and crap - I'm sure you've seen the McDonalds cases...
And honestly, with the amount they make... charging $50 for a tee for medium, is just greed, never utility. It also gets affected by inflation too I will admit but people always want more than they can get. Buy it low, sell it high mantra.

If you need bigger clothes for whatever reason, you pay for the clothes you need, because it's production cost, not 'fat tax'. Having a healthy-looking person not pay more for a larger size, but the overweight person should is hypocrisy. You can be healthy how you choose, that doesn't mean you can 'cheat' the system.

Sewing models differently for certain proportions is another matter though... They should totally do that, but I can guarantee you that it won't change pricing much, sizes require more fabric as you go up, be it because of muscle mass or fat. You're not being punished for it, you're paying for the size you need to be comfortable in, which needs more material than a smaller size does. Why should smaller sizes pay more for less material, and why should bigger people be 'rewarded' for being bigger? You can flip it to be unfair in every way if you want to. That doesn't make sense. It makes sense to pay for what you need, within reason, and it is reasonable that you pay a little more to get a comfortable size.

[Quincey]

Yes, but not a lot more.

The extra material is a tiny fraction of the overall cost. The markup doesn't need to be any higher.

[Vargulf the Happy Husky]

as a rather large person, i would be completely ok with paying more for clothing as long as the extra cost only reflects the extra material used.

so like $5-$10 more

[Lochton]

This isn't clothing that's being rationed by the government for social justice purposes. It's a product that's being sold on the free market. People have the freedom to choose the retailer that meets their pricing needs, just as they have the right to choose to shovel 10,000 calories down their gullet in one sitting.

Yes, they have a freedom of choice but unlike fast food, you need clothings to do your job (for most common jobs). If you were to make things as important as clothings to be more expensive, you could as well just put a sign saying, 'leave if you dare', for some will see it like so.

- - - Updated - - -

as a rather large person, i would be completely ok with paying more for clothing as long as the extra cost only reflects the extra material used.

so like $5-$10 more

As I said before, I wouldn't mind but I would be demanding my kid's clothing to be damn near free then.

- - - Updated - - -

Sure, if tall men earn more than manlets and women. Surely thats fine since tall men require more food and material for their cloths and shoes?


Thats what you are pushing for

I wouldn't mind a bonus on my pay due to height..

[Vargulf the Happy Husky]

As I said before, I wouldn't mind but I would be demanding my kid's clothing to be damn near free then.

yeah, the way my wife brings home clothes for my kids you would think they were free....

meanwhile i wear my undies and socks till the holes completely take over lol

[Lochton]

yeah, the way my wife brings home clothes for my kids you would think they were free....

meanwhile i wear my undies and socks till the holes completely take over lol

-_-

I know the feeling, mate. I know.. Luckily summer, so the socks will slowly be switched out. And the wife and I had a good haul of clothings in the UK, still cheap there - for now.

[Themius]

I feel like the OP made this post thinking it'd bait people into getting into an argument about fat shaming or something.

But no, as a fat person myself it totally makes sense to charge more, it's not like we have fat people rights or fat equality, which would be stupid.

More materials = higher cost.

Fat people should understand that well, I mean when we order more food it costs more.

no.. more material doesn't = higher cost... cost on clothing is already grossly inflated... "it cost .01 penny more!" well how the fuck are you going to quantify that in a price?

- - - Updated - - -

as a rather large person, i would be completely ok with paying more for clothing as long as the extra cost only reflects the extra material used.

so like $5-$10 more

5-10 more? You aren't thinking at all...

the material is dirt cheap... it cost almost nothing to make the clothes in larger sizes.