Slashdot Mirror
Samoa Air Rolling Out "Pay As You Weigh" Fares
cylonlover writes "Thrifty Samoans looking to take a trip may want to shed a few pounds before booking a flight with Samoan Air after the airline announced the implementation of a 'pay as you weigh' system. Unlike some other airlines that have courted controversy by forcing some obese passengers to purchase two seats, Samoa's national carrier will charge passengers based on their weight."
They have a demo fare calculator for the curious.
Jules:
I wouldn’t go so far as to call the brother fat, I mean he got a weight problem. What’s the nigger gonna do? He’s Samoan.
I have been to Samoa, and you see a lot of extremely obese people there, even by American standards, so this does not surprise me.
It makes sense to pay per weight, it's a good idea the question is: will you be able to get a larger sit? If they could fold sits somehow to make 2 into 1, I can see people buying those types of sits even if they don't need to. Actually 2 economy sits cost less than 1 business class (and definitely more than 1 first class), but if the picture ITFA is of their plane, then I am probably taking it too far.
You can't handle the truth.
I have a definite issue with this sort of a system. Why should I, a 5' 10" man have to pay more for weighing 180# than a woman that's 5' tall and weighing only 100#? Genetics has a huge impact there, this isn't the result of my choosing to be an extra 10" taller than the woman and carrying the requisite weight that entails, it's an issue of the genes that I was born with.
What's interesting about their approach is that it seems to ignore baggage, which is something which people can easily do something about. Sure, the morbidly obese can and should lose weight, but this seems like an awful lot of unwarranted discrimination against people who are taller and just larger regardless of causation.
That's really the bottom line here. Despite the negative stigma this may cause to the airline, I'm actually suprised this hasn't come about sooner. As it says, these are not big jets; they're small planes and the population doesn't exactly have a reputation for being skinny (and we can blame industrial "progress" for that).
If computers were people, I'd be a misanthrope.
especially considering airplane fuel is carefully calculated depending on the payload weight, it makes sense. And even more so if the aircraft is small, such as Samoan Air's.
It appears that their cost formula is a strictly linear equation:
Cost (price) = weight (kilograms) x rate (price per kilogram)
Though their cost formula doesn't take into account the amount of airplane that each person also needs to haul around in addition to themselves; the price to fly children is disproportionately cheap, while larger adults are disproportionately expnsive.
I probably would have priced it as such if my goal were to meet expenses
Cost (price) = fixed_cost (price) + weight (kilograms) x rate (price per kilogram)
The weight of the cargo largely determines actual cost to move the plane from point A to point B. I see nothing wrong with this.
Clothing Manufacturers will soon price their garments based on the size, arguing that size 48 pants require 42% more fabric and stitching than a size 34 and are also bulkier to ship.
Is this the result of Daylight-Savings-Time, or my misunderstanding of how the International Date Line works?
Hilarious, guys, really.
This is awesome.
When I last flew (a year ago), my luggage weighed more than I did, and I had to pay extra to take that much luggage, while people who weighed twice as much as I did paid no extra, and still got to take on the normal luggage allowance.
From the article "rates starting at $1 Samoan Tala (US$0.44) per kilogram (2.2 lb) including baggage," - I approve of this.
Does the ADA apply to American Samoa?
If so, taller people, who tend to be heavier than shorter people, will sue for discrimination based on the "handicap" of being tall.
They may not have to sue the airline, they may sue the regulatory agency asking for a court order for the agency to rescind the permission it granted the airline to use this fare structure.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
if you weigh more, it requires more gasoline, and total weight must be calculated on how the plane will preform. Now as a red blooded American, I also agree with this, if you don't like it don't fly it, or loose some weight, and stop being a pussy and saying its discrimination, at this point is about math and the total weight of the plane.
I am used to flying steerage / cargo class on airlines, getting service that is generally no better than that given to packages that I ship. I generally pay UPS by the pound, why shouldn't I pay airlines the same way?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
on this mutherfucking plane!
> They have a demo fare calculator for the curious.
"Sir, there's been an incident. Samoan Air Demo Calculator is down."
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
More for longer flights. You estimate your weight when you book, then weigh in before the flight.
Lol.
man those samoans are a surly bunch
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
I'm big, and this seems perfectly reasonable to me. Weight and size affects the cost of transport, and it may affect seating as well.
Though I have to say, if you charge more, but don't arrange for the comfort of both the larger persons and those that might be seated near them, you really aren't addressing the issue all that well. Pretending a seven foot tall guy fits in, or behind, or in front of, a seat designed for a five foot tall person (who apparently only has one arm, judging by the armrest configurations) isn't fooling anyone. Likewise, for widebody people, a seat designed for narrow hips doesn't cut it. If I sit in front of you, my head will be in your dinner plate if I recline at all. Well, ok, your peanut bag, anyway. If you sit in front of me, you're likely to find my feet right behind yours. This is part of the reason I no longer fly. The rest being accounted for by the TSA nonsense.
Frankly, I'm amazed that "regular" size people put up with typical airline seating. Outside of first class. That's something else again.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
You may play the genetics card, but the airline should be able to play the physics card.
more weight carried = more fuel needed.
They could just as well budget 500 lbs or so per passenger for passenger and luggage and set their prices accordingly.
Skinny people and light packers would be extra profit.
No need to be an ass about things.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
"I wouldn't go so far as to call the brother fat. He's got a weight problem. What's the brother gonna do, he's Samoan."
Seeing that fuel costs are mainly due to airplane weight, its logical to bill by Kg of luggage.
In extension its logical to do the same for people.
But. If paying more, i expect to have more room on that plane.
For me, being 2 meters tall, this would be a welcome change. I simply need more legroom than that 140cm girl that for her standards gets a business seat. (my table won't even come down on flights within europe, my knees occupy that fold mechanism's space)
Being a rather skinny guy at 65kg, I'd obviously be OK with this. What I do wonder about is seat sizes/leg room. Does the cost of my ticket entitle me to as much space as someone who weighs 130kg (either by virtue of being tall or wide) who paid double what I did? That's the only thing I can immediately see as being unfair...
Maybe they should also increase the fee for health insurance more significantly if you're enormous. That would have to be more of a BMI thing but seriously, I should not be paying this much for insurance. I think the average increase for tobacco users is like 40% and it's even less for fat people. Well guess what! It should be 10x for tobacco users and 10x for fat people and then they can easily drop mine 4x. Talk about a motivator to lose weight and stop smoking! Flood insurance is calculated precisely by risk of actually flooding. Why not health insurance? In fact one trampoline or pool alone can double your homeowner's insurance because that's the mathematical increase in probability of having a claim. If you're 400 pounds or smoke a pack a day, I'd say your odds of needing healthcare actually exceed my own by 1000x.
So yeah, plane tickets, health insurance, buffets, hit them everywhere that it's realistic so they can get an idea of the actual impact on society and business costs because they're so damn fat.
What I find interesting (and quite frankly, hypocritical) is that the current socially acceptable behavior is that we MUST be tolerant of pretty much everything from fibromyalgia to bipolar disorder (formerly known as manic depression), from ADHD to an ever broadening definition of autism. Furthermore, it's socially acceptable to DEMAND that taxpayers throw gobs of money at treating these things as disabilities. Yet when it comes to obesity, it's considered deviant behavior and is to be ridiculed and punished.
As someone with daughter that just turned two years old, meaning we now have to pay for a ticket for her to fly, this sounds like a great deal to me.
Will one get food as I weight as well? And bigger seat or even two seats?
I personally don't weight much above the average, but have very long legs and they weight too so part of the fee is just for them! Will they remove the seat before me so I can sit in the same way people with normal legs' length do?
You're confusing unreasonable discrimination -- based upon things that actually have no effect such as skin color or sex -- with reasonable discrimination -- based upon things that do have an actual effect such as bringing your pet on board when your pet is a puppy, as opposed to bringing your pet on board when your pet is an elephant. Weight and size actually affect cost of transport. Is it fair to average out the costs, so that people who, as you point out, through no fault of their own, are lighter than you, end up paying a portion of your transport costs? It might be convenient, but is is actually fair? Now consider: most anti-discrimination law is in place to impose fairness where fairness wasn't happening. So do you really think that such law would be properly employed to make that 120 kg woman pay for ~20 kg of your ticket? If so, why? So you can pretend to weigh 140 kg?
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Asians fly for less than europeans?
women fly for less than men?
amputees fly for less then their whole counterparts?
younger people fly for less than older people?
And on a weight loss program. It does seem reasonable that heavy people should pay more for an airline ticket. It promotes health.
I'm guessing this will be yet another airline that Kevin Smith refuses to fly on.
Reseource Limit Reached on the pay-by-weight calculator. Someone step off the scale please.
If you try using the demo calculator as of 11:00 EST the website is overloaded and gives an error message. Love me the power of the internets.
Enjoy post-apocalyptic and singularity science fiction? Check out www.demonarchives.com, a new online graphic-novel.
Moving mass requires energy. The amount of energy required increases in proportion to the mass. Energy used by an airplane is supplied by fuel that costs money. More mass, more fuel, more money. Full stop. This has nothing to do with health, or discrimination, or anything else besides the laws of physics.
Is it just me or the photo galleries on http://www.samoaair.ws/ for destinations are a brilliant idea!
Lets see here, I'm 215lbs so lets multiply by .454 and see what the price is...
"Resource Limit Is Reached"
"The website is temporarily unable to service your request as it exceeded resource limit. Please try again later."
Well that was offensive!
This is an important question. The airline could offer free cake and donuts during the flight. "Go for it fatty. You know you want it. Take the cake you pathetic bucket of lard!"
I'd be OK with this if they had seats more widely spaced so that fatter people (paying more) get room so THEY are comfortable too.
It's not as if the "fatties" get a comfortable seat at the moment, is it, so even if "the poor person stuck next to them overflowing the seat" is a valid complaint, charging more won't solve that problem.
Instead of 3 seats in an aisle, have two and charge 50% more to sit in them. Done.
You're buying a seat. I can see if you can't fit into it (been next to people like that). It's not like the airlines are packing customers in like freight. You're paying for a SEAT and considering all the other factors in an aircraft, the weight of a passenger is hardly a game changer. The maximum take-off weight of an Airbus 319 is 140,000 lbs. Assuming a generous 200lbs per person, that works out to less than1/5 of the weight being passengers.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
When I was a kid I remember my mom paying per pound before boarding a helicopter. She wasn't obese, so it wasn't a slam at her. Planes and helicopters have a limit to what they can lift. If I owned an airline I'd want two 150lb paying passengers than one 300lb passenger.
photosMy Photostream
Actually 2 economy sits cost less than 1 business class (and definitely more than 1 first class)
Everyone knows that economy is the least expensive seat on the plane, we'll represent it as X. Business is the next most expensive, we'll represent it as Y. First class is the most, we'll call it Z. Hopefully, I haven't completely blown your mind yet.
We can then say that X
You stated
2 economy sits cost less than 1 business class
So we can say 2X
You then also said
and definitely more than 1 first class
Which would mean 2X>Z
Hence this means Y>2X>Z, or Y>Z. Except everyone who has ever flown on any plane, ever, knows that Z>Y.
Why is math so hard for you? And why on earth do people pay you to write code when you can't handle simple math? There can't possibly be that many people looking for code that discards logic and substitutes in religious scripture, can there?
They could just as well budget 500 lbs or so per passenger for passenger and luggage and set their prices accordingly. Skinny people and light packers would be extra profit. No need to be an ass about things.
Charging "extra profit" means the business model can be made more efficient by competition, until there's no "extra profit" remaining. Of course, the inherent unfairness of life makes the left just crazy. In their world, every person needs to be treated the same, like a cog in a machine. Unless of course, they survived a botched abortion. Then the mother should be allowed to kill them, right Mr. Obama?
Lots of discussion here about why a 6' tall 200 pound person (who would be technically overweight, definitely not skinny) wouldn't expect to pay as much as a 5' tall 200 pound person (who would definitely be obese).
Planes have a limited amount of lift (and can only lift so much weight), but before you hit that limit you'd hit another bottleneck -- planes have limited numbers of seats. Assuming that you can only fit x people on the plane and that planes will always be full to capacity (they all seem to be these days), and assuming their weight/fare formula guarantees that each extra pound is profitable for the airline, it's the to airline's advantage to carry non-obese people.
If you have 300 seats, you can fill them with the 6' tall 200 pound people, 1 per seat. If you try to fill it with 5' tall 200 pound people, they will take up more than one seat each. You will make less money filling a plane with the obese people than the overweight people who still fit in one seat.
What would be REALLY interesting is if they will also pay employees based on their weight?
I imagine some kind of bonus/surcharge on top of their standard pay rate might be able to work, without it devolving into an unhealthy situation (e.g. bulimia).
Awhile back, I noticed a "Sky Tram" ride had a limit of 300 lb per couple. I understand why they did that, but it was still annoying, since at the time, I was over 200, and my GF was certainly well over 100.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
I'm 6'5", and I don't approve this message.
Someone having the guts to shamelessly charge based on a direct factor in costs.
Baggage included too.
It appears that the majority of the users here believe it is perfectly acceptable for airlines to charge fat people more as they weight more and use up more fuel. I am willing to bet these exact same people are completely against data caps of any form. It is the same problem. A small minority of people consume more resources than the average person, thus they will face limits and be forced to pay more for their overconsumption based lifestyle should they exceed them.
How many people here are gleefully consuming multiple 10's of gigabytes per month on grandfathered unlimited data tiers? How many of them are also pulling more than 250-300 gb per month over their broadband connection? Well guess what, you are the digital equivalent of a fat person on a plane that needs to pay for two seats.
I usually drive. I find there's a lot to be said for loading up my camera gear and suitcases in a fine automobile and taking off. There's no baggage limit, I get to eat at nice restaurants, sleep in luxury accommodations, my seating in the car itself is wonderfully comfortable, I control the environment, there are no crying babies or diseased traveling "companions", I get to pick the music, the when and what of mealtimes, I can use my cellphone (or ham/sw radio if I take my own vehicle) simply by pulling over, I get to see the countryside and the cityscapes, I can stop off and visit friends, meet people I've only known online, hit up everything from symphonies to comedy clubs to strip joints, and not once will anyone try to feed me peanuts. :)
I've dug for diamonds in Arkansas, spelunked in Virginia, gone diving off of the Keys, watched a couple of space shuttle launches (and one abort... sometimes you draw the short straw), gone skiing about everywhere you can in the US, entered a couple of martial arts tournaments I randomly came across, marched in several political events, and shot photos of just about anything that would hold still enough for long enough for me to get my gear online. I've been to most major national parks off season and on. When I decide to take a trip, I look forward to it and then I consume it. I have developed business interests on both coasts and live in Montana, so my excuses are legion. :)
The only thing I find slightly annoying is the ratcheting down of speed limits as one gets closer to the coasts. Not that people drive a lot slower, typically, they don't, but I'm not inclined risk my license, so I obey the posted limits. Can be irritating to others on the road. One time I was driving along Rt 6 in NY, near Middletown, with my lady and a friend from the area. I was keeping to the speed limit, which was 50 mph on that winding, hilly road. I was in my own car, so carrying Montana plates. Guy passes me going somewhat faster, yells out the window: "Go back to the grand canyon!" We laughed about that all through dinner.
On occasion, I take an ocean liner or a train. On that very rare instance when someone says "can you be at X by Y" and it doesn't seem doable, I simply tell them, sorry, no.
If your job is so awful that it forces you to fly, well then, you'll be flying. I've simply made it a point to never allow that kind of control to be exerted over me. These days, the "need" to physically be somewhere at a certain time is a lot more limited than it used to be. I can face-to-face interface with just about anyone who can get to a computer, anywhere in the world. I see little reason to insist on smelling people's armpits as well.
Actually, I'm cool with "blowing" my entire vacation driving. I like to drive; I'm good at it, and I make it a point to rent something interesting from time to time. I try to drive a new (to me) route as much as possible. The US is huge and there's more to see than I could ever manage to see. I've done some long haul motorcycling too, but eventually found that to be physically wearing out of proportion to the fun, so no more of that.
Yep. But while you were on there, you had access to power which you could use to keep a laptop, ipad, music player or video player up and running. You could have slept in your chair, or your bunk if you took a sleeper or a full cabin. They'll serve you meals, and you can pay too much for junk food at the concession thing. I'm not saying they couldn't do better,
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
You need to justify the added cost each pound adds to the cost of flying the airplane. I don't think a few pounds will make a huge difference in the fuel cost.
Also any airline doing this kind of thing is going to also have to justify that the airline themselves have done everything possible to minimize the weight of the equipment and content on the plane before passing the buck to heavy customers. I would be outraged if the airline had several thousand pounds of redundant content on an airline (such as empty meal carts or trays, unused cabin accessories, even non-passenger cargo) before passing the buck to me to charge for my added weight to the plane.
I don't care if I am charged by weight, but I'm not going to subsidize the airline running itself inefficiently.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
Oh, I thought it said Somalia. Of course pay by weight would be good for their citizens. Likewise with Samoans though. If TV has taught me anything, it is that Samoans are some of the largest spam-fed creatures there are. Paying by weight may be fair for everyone.
As with most air transportation, the cargo is actually a rather minimal fraction of the total weight. That the cargo is alive and human in this case means little, the way you get packed in economy you can as well be called freight.
Take your average Boeing 767. Doesn't matter which plane you take, switch out for an Airbus if you feel more European today. Let's make it a sardine bin front to back without any fancy-shmancy first class crap and cram 375 units of human freight in.
Now, let's look at the weight. Empty, this human cargo freighter weighs 229k lbs. Fuel weight of course depends on the distance we plan to travel, but up to 24.1k gallons can be filled. With roughly 7 lbs a gallon, we're looking at up to 168k lbs, let's just say 146k lbs so we get the take off weight of the plane without cargo to 375k lbs.
So, if this plane is at least almost filled up, every single passenger is "weighing" an additional 1000 lbs to his own weight. So, let's compare the difference between a, say 100 lbs person and a 300 lbs person. So, the former comes with 1100 lbs, the latter with 1300 lbs, for "his share" of the plane weight.
In other words, a person three times as heavy as the other one comes down to a weight increase of 15%. And I think it would be quite fair if he paid an extra 15% to account for that.
Not quite what that calculator spat out, though...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Discriminating for jobs or home/house and protected class - over 40, person of color, women, gay/lesbian, religion - is completely different than saying fat people have to pay more.
It's perfectly legal in the US to say -"No fat people allowed.".
If you're not a member of a protected class, then you're screwed.
If I were the lawyer, I'd try to make a case that this rule discriminates against old people because they're more likely to be fat.
Whereas by your calculations, weighing 2x ought to cost 1.5x.
PS how much fuel is it having to carry? And 20kg of luggage weighs 20kg whether your arse fits in a thimble or needs a full sized sofa.
well, it's a no brainer if you have the option for a 300km/h line. but for a route like that, it's likely a bus would get you there in half a day anyhow
Clearly you have not seen the traffic in Europe. You cannot generally calculate travel time by taking the distance and dividing by ~100 km/h for motorway speeds like you can in Canada and the US. I knew an American postdoc who planned to drive his family from Cambridge to Hadrian's wall (~200 km) for a day trip because he thought it would just be a 2 hour drive each way - he did not have a good weekend!
A higher population density helps trains more than just by making the lines more economical: it makes driving far less attractive!
the left ... crazy ... abortion... Obama
wow, way to run off the rails there. seek counseling
Granted, you have a point about a potential flaw in that proposal regarding the realities of an unregulated market.
About half of all my flights last year I sat next to someone who's belly enveloped the armrest.
Half.
Maybe I'm flying to the wrong places.
But I'm not getting a discount for the < 90% of a seat I'm left to occupy.
Forget the fuel cost of weight... this is justice.
You were correct right up to the point where you equated the differential power it takes to transfer extra bits to the differential fuel it takes to move mass. And that, as they say, it where you fail it.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Another poster stated this
"I have a definite issue with this sort of a system. Why should I, a 5' 10" man have to pay more for weighing 180# than a woman that's 5' tall and weighing only 100#? Genetics has a huge impact there, this isn't the result of my choosing to be an extra 10" taller than the woman and carrying the requisite weight that entails, it's an issue of the genes that I was born with.
What's interesting about their approach is that it seems to ignore baggage, which is something which people can easily do something about. Sure, the morbidly obese can and should lose weight, but this seems like an awful lot of unwarranted discrimination against people who are taller and just larger regardless of causation."
I contend that this is the same type of blanket situation for small people and alcohol, both pay the same price for a beer, but the larger of the two will have a lower BAC than a small person (and many other factors) . That didn't stop the law on drinking and driving from being enacted. It is basically designed to force smaller individual from ever being able to enjoy a drink at a restaurant. I know there are lots of other factors that make a .08 limit but essentially, bigger folks can consume more and be penalized less.
As for the weight cost argument, there are many other factors with this also, body shape and length, chair size and leg room are just a few. Even thin tiny people still have a hard time getting into a seat due to limited leg room, and I would contend that as airlines cut out more and more space for additional seats, they are in essence cutting down the survival rate of a downed plane that didn't end in a ball of fire where people could survive, but now might not due to the inability to easily maneuver out of a seat. Also if you have a dense boned individual that is identical in height and shape as their counterpart, they are paying x dollars more because they are a few pounds heavier.
I understand that you have to pay relating directly to your weight, but should that really be the only thing considered? It costs a flat rate for all the crew on board, regardless if they have 10 passengers or 200. Runway fees are the same regardless of the amount (or size of) the people on board. The amount of weight that the plane already carries never changes, only the cargo on board, so the cost of flying just an empty plane should be considered an overhead cost.
This system should be defined as a base rate plus a charge by the weight you add to the flight. Otherwise you get into the situation where you have a plane full of anorexic people, and the amount they paid doesn't even equal what it costs for the plane to fly empty.
I know I look fat, but it is just these helium balloons in my pants... :-)
So who is going to want to fly anywhere on a plane crawling (literally) with babies and small children? Now that every Samoan can take 10-15 kids for the price of one adult you can be sure I'm never getting on one of their planes.
The reason we subjugate ourselves to law is to better procure justice. If law does not accomplish this purpose then it m
Second seat purchases should be enforced by width. On my last flight, there was this dude who was short and stocky, and probably weighed about 200, but he was WIIIIIIIIIIIIIDE .. he was half sitting in my seat and his own. Pissed me off quite a bit.
I was especially appalled by the famous London subways (and took a double take when I saw what they wanted from me to ride on it).
I'm not surprised you were shocked if you were trying to ride on something you found in a London subway. Next time I'd suggest you take the London Underground, usually referred to as the tube.
I weigh in at 135 lbs, highly unlikely to carry more than 40 lbs of luggage and I am supposed to subsidize fat people? People who pack heavy? Why is that ok? Oh, because you're fat, got it. It's all good as long as _you_ are ok with it, I guess.
Only I can judge you.
LOL fill the seats with anorexic girls and the company will go broke!! If I were an anorexic girl, I would keep flying back and forth just for the fun of it :)
I don't suppose they'll charge any less for infants, toddlers and people of small stature? They'll still charge full price for the seat.
Fly for free.
Samoan anorexics rejoice!
all that hard work of starving themselves is finally paying off!
Thus it is vitally important to get a receipt after every trip to the lavatory while on the plane.
Hawai'i has big commercial airlines that fly between islands and to the mainland, but it also has a (variable) number of small airlines that typically use small 10-12-seat planes. They're often cheaper, and they usually fly out of the commuter/freight terminals instead of the main terminals, so you don't have to wait in the TSA security line or do TSA baggage inspection; the planes are small enough they don't pretend terrorists are going to crash it into buildings, and they don't carry enough fuel to hijack the plane to Cuba. The airline people still have to use a metal-detector wand, but there's none of the abuse, and the person putting your luggage onto the plane is often the pilot.
On the other hand, they do need to know your weight. It doesn't affect the price, but they need to balance the plane properly. So I usually end up sitting in the back with the Samoans and local Hawai'ian guys :-)
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
You are not purchasing the seat. You are purchasing passage on an existing vehicle. Whether or not it suits your needs is up to you.
So you have NO PROBLEM with discriminating against, and CHARGING MORE to people who DO NOT gorge their faces?
Perhaps YOU are the one who is "being an ass"
So you have NO PROBLEM with discriminating against, and CHARGING MORE to people who DO NOT gorge their faces?
See, it's that assumption that because someone's fat that it is the result of a character flaw or lack of willpower. You're assuming things about someone you know nothing about.
But you're right, fat sweaty slobs smell funny and wheeze annoyingly when they breathe, they should just stay home where they won't disgust the rest of us.