The Australian government is bent on making fat people slim in the most condescending way possible.

Eric's overweight and blue.

Last month, an incredibly juvenile media campaign was launched to encourage Australians to make healthier lifestyle choices.

The “Swap it, Don’t Stop it” campaign is a multimedia extravaganza, featuring television, print and radio ads, an iPhone app and Facebook page.

I feel stupider for receiving healthy lifestyle tips from a simple-minded balloon called Eric. Some pearls of wisdom from the portly blue balloon include swapping “big for small” portions on your plate and “often for sometimes” in regards to naughty treats.

The campaign reaches its nadir with the audacious promise that you can “lose your belly without having to lose out on the things you love.”

Eric doesn’t want to end up with cancer, type-2 diabetes and heart disease, much like a non-balloon person. But diet and exercise is a personal choice and I would be staggered if anyone adopted a healthier lifestyle because the government tells them to.

With the budget bottom-line looking perilous, the taxpayer shouldn’t be funding an enormous health campaign imploring us to swap four scoops of ice-cream for a calorie-light two. It’s an expensive way to inform Australians of the completely obvious.

A utilitarian might rationalise that a costly public health campaign is justified if a healthier public reduces the burden on the government-funded health system. As the saying goes, prevention is cheaper than a cure.

Health Minister Nicola Roxon referred to the cost of obesity when announcing the “Swap it, Don’t Stop it” campaign—claiming that it cost Australia $58.2 billion in 2008 alone. Fat people are not only cardiovascular time-bombs but, according to these figures, economic vandals too.

Roxon’s claiming, in effect, that a healthy society is responsible economic management. But the obese aren’t a great burden on the government’s finances—simply because unhealthy people tend to die prematurely. A healthy pensioner, after all, costs the government more than a dead one.

I’m not saying that a healthier society isn’t an end in itself but that economic considerations shouldn’t be used to justify government health campaigns when all the data isn’t included in their headline-grabbing figures.

The “Swap it, Don’t Stop it” campaign also raises the important issue of whether the government is overreaching, especially when we presently have all the information we need that eating junk food is bad for you and exercise good.

Even the empty-headed understands the virtue of brown bread over white, a regular morning walk and pitfalls of a KFC Double Down burger. There is no information vacuum around these simple lifestyle choices and no such thing as an unwitting glutton.

A constant criticism of Labor is that it doesn’t know what it stands for but I would argue it does.

Since the Rudd government was elected in 2007, Labor has demonstrated an ideological commitment to big government. It’s a uniquely Labor trait for the government to impose itself on the country.

The Labor government suffered from delusions of grandeur in economic management, stimulating the economy in 2008 with malfunctioning pink batts, overpriced school halls and cash handouts for everyone; it intends to build; operate and monopolise a $36 billion national broadband network; it re-regulated the workplace via the Fair Work Act; it imposed a gratuitous new tax on the mining industry without consultation; it hiked taxes on cigarettes and is legislating to deprive smokers the right to choose an aesthetically pleasing brand—for an entirely legal product, mind you; it’s seeking to de-carbonate the economy; and now wants to protect us from ourselves in relation to diet and lazy lifestyles.

Maybe the government should stick to its core functions and leave people with the responsibility to lead relatively healthy lives.

If people want to be gluttons, so be it—they’ll suffer the consequences.

Anyway, few people are going to eat less or exercise more because the government says so, especially when its spokesman is a balloon.

94 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Sarah Bath says:

      07:12am | 22/04/11

      The idea is fine.  Apart from saving the environment by reducing carbon emissions, our policy of making animal farming unprofitable thereby encouraging veganism has a secondary effect vis: people are healthier and the result is less burden on health care.

      The government has a responsibility to ensure the health of society and f this achieves the goal then so be it.  The end justifies the means.


      Peace

    • Andy D says:

      11:49am | 22/04/11

      As has been said before, scratch a Green and you will find a Socialist underneath, scratch a Socialist and you will find a Fascist underneath.

      At least Sarah Bath is honest enough to wear her Socialist and Fascist beliefs on the outside for all to see.

    • Dave C says:

      12:07pm | 22/04/11

      So if animal farming become unprofitable the farmers shut up shop and the towns that are supported by the farms close down. Tell me where do all those people go to live work etc. They go to the cities and increase the already existing pollution and other urban environmental problems there. As well the people have to move to the city and work in factories which increases emissions the cost of transporting people away from country towns also imposes extra carbon emissions.

    • michael j says:

      12:07pm | 22/04/11

      @Sarah Bath-so you would agree with me in saying the Government is complicit in my impending Death from nicotine addiction when they should have taken cigarettes off the market in the 60’s instead of pandering to Capitalist tobacco companies and wrongfully collecting tax’s off of my addiction they Government have shown no remorse what so ever by putting adds on tv to terrorise me me about coughing up blood,,
      As for the fact i am 200 kg and type 2 as well,,what can i say pass the lettuce leaf ,,and put a TAX on FAT content in foods,,,Stupid adds will not help me now,, Do you know a good Lawyer to commence a large damages claim to make this and all Government’s own up to their responsibly,,,,,,

    • Sarah Bath says:

      05:50pm | 22/04/11

      @AndyD- Your comment is not worthy of a response.
      @DaveC - Changing to sustainable farming practices such as organic farming or use their land for renewable energy schemes.
      @michealj - why does the government tax cigarettes yet makes cannabis illegal? Because they cant tax the latter.  Decriminalise all drugs.  Tax all drugs to fund better health

    • Dave C says:

      07:50pm | 22/04/11

      “@DaveC - Changing to sustainable farming practices such as organic farming or use their land for renewable energy schemes.”

      Ba ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha…........

      Do you know how much it costs to transfer land from traditional grazing practices to “organic farming” or “renewable energy schemes” if you force farmers off their land then constitutionally you must pay compensation. Also do you how much less income a farmer will get from “organic farming” or “renewable energy schemes” really do you..??
      Also farmers need to see traditional tools of trade and buy others to get less income which still means rural towns will die adding to already clogged infrastructure. Think of Tasmania which has the highest Green Vote, they produce nothing for the economy and have the highest % of people on welfare. That is what happen under your policy of “organic farming” and “renewable energy source”

      The reasons you are ignorant of this is because like a typical greens voter/zealot you are an urban based know all know nothing who is trying to tell people from places you could not even locate on a map let alone how they live, to change their life for some Utopian Hippie communist fairies at the bottom of the garden wet dream.

      You are an absolute joke.

    • Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

      01:12am | 23/04/11

      So tell me Sarah does your uniform come with cute little swastikas on it? ?Don’t try to tell me hoe to live

    • Ryan says:

      02:01am | 23/04/11

      How does a comment that has absolutely nothing to do with the subject actually get through. Please ban this moron, we are sick of her trolling.

    • Andy D says:

      10:21am | 23/04/11

      Sarah, saying my post is not worthy of a response is just a piss-poor cop out.

      You are clearly a socialist, you have said so yourself in the post a few weeks ago where you stated that you vote green because your chosen party, Socialist Alliance, is too unpalatable for the voting public to support.

      You also stated in the same post that you felt it “unfortunate” that we live in a democracy and can’t just force everyone to be vegans. This sounds very much like a move from simple Socialism to seriously extreme Fascism.

      You can’t walk and talk like a Fascist and then go all coy when someone calls you out. I used to think, like many around here, that you are a fictional right wing shill but now I think you are for real, which is a much scarier prospect.

    • LC says:

      11:33am | 23/04/11

      I dunno, Andy, I still think she is a, to put it in her terms, “neocon” shill. I don’t think even the looniest of the left would act like her.

      This is the internet dear. Once you make any claim here, there’s no going back on it wink

    • Bruce says:

      02:33pm | 24/04/11

      Sarah, so you would agree that increasing power costs is good for the health of pensioners who now ‘can not’ afford to keep warm in winter time. Instead they should run around the block as many times as they can to keep warm and fit. I guess the end justifies the means !

    • Govt@FauxCitizen says:

      12:19am | 25/04/11

      Bwaaahhh, my motto “Hunt only what you can eat, eat only what you hunt”. Kangaroo and deer venison are my faves but GOOSE is on the menu tonight.

    • Liz I says:

      01:35pm | 19/05/11

      I disagree, as a personal trainer I know how hard people find it to make even simple changes in their lives. With all the health and exercise information around people are overwhelmed. Providing clear and realistic ways for them to change their live to a healthier one can only be positive. Perhaps using a cartoon was the wrong choice for some but it also takes away the fear factor. Despite what you may think the average joe finds exercise and trying to be healthy scary.

    • OchreBunyip says:

      07:29am | 22/04/11

      The Swap It campaign reminds me of the Slip, Slop, Slap and Life. Be In It campaigns, both presented in a lighthearted manner, aimed at a laudable goal and, with anecdotal evidence only, they made an impression upon people. Sure, it is light-hearted, perhaps childlike but presenting it as evidence of a Big Government philosophy is drawing a long bow. Perhaps it is supposed to appeal to children as well as adults?

    • Chinaski says:

      12:24pm | 22/04/11

      I think a more direct ad which reflects the truth would be more appropriate.

      The fact is you can eat whatever you want… you just have to be able to work it off.

      I’ll eat a big greasy McDonald’s meal, but I’ll excercise later that day and make sure I can work off what I eat. It’s called being responsible.

      I think an ad with a scary-looking personal trainer telling you you’re fat and you’re only going to get fatter would be more effective.  All this mollycoddling takes the seriousness away from the situation and allows people to think they don’t need to exercise or stop eating foods that are bad for you.

      I know it’s been said before and I know it’s a bit of a touchy subject, but since when was being overweight (note: overweight = unhealthy) OK?

    • marley says:

      01:21pm | 22/04/11

      Chinaski - it’s about more than just “working off” lousy food.  No one is going to get diabetes from the odd Big Mac, but make a steady diet of nothing but junk food, and you could be lean as a whippet through exercise, and still have sky high cholesterol, high blood pressure, arteriosclerosis, etc, etc.  It’s not all about weight.

    • Lawrence says:

      07:45am | 22/04/11

      Hi Brendan,

      You say “Roxon’s claiming, in effect, that a healthy society is responsible economic management. But the obese aren’t a great burden on the government’s finances—simply because unhealthy people tend to die prematurely. A healthy pensioner, after all, costs the government more than a dead one.”

      But the obese are also more likely to die before retirement age with a string of very expensive chronic health problems, which means a few less years of pension payments but also years of health expenditure and lost tax revenue.

      I don’t suppose you have any statistics to support your position?

    • marley says:

      11:37am | 22/04/11

      I think he’s totally missed the fact that Diabetes 2, which used to be a disease of older folk, is now affecting children and teenagers.  A ten year old with type 2 Diabetes won’t live as long as a 10 year old without it, but he’s sure as heck going to run up massive medical costs for all the associated ailments over the course of his (shortened) lifespan. 

      No one debates the wisdom of government campaigns against smoking.  So what’s the big deal with government campaigns against lousy diet and lifestyle choices?

    • Condor says:

      02:23pm | 22/04/11

      True. Fat and unhealthy people should be forced to pay for their affects on society and the economy similar to smokers and drinkers

      There should be higher taxes on foods that aren’t natural healthy food and sugary drinks and fat people should have to pay more for visits to the doctor and health insurance premiums

    • Adam says:

      08:38am | 22/04/11

      Hang on Brendan, are you a doctor?  Health worker?  Statistician?  Marketing or Advertising executive?  Health sector analyst or economist?  No?  None of those things?  So why am I to believe that you know anything about how much treating diabetes costs, or whether this campaign will work or not, or whether the cost will be offset by health sector gains?  I see no statistics in your article?  As far as I read, your argument seems to be: “I don’t like the campaign, and I don’t like labour, so I know it’s going to be a failure” - even your base assertion, that a dead pensioner is cheaper than a live one is incorrect.  Cost of dialysis: $83k/yr * avg time of 4 years=$332k, Cost of kidney transplant: $70k, Cost of transplant maintenance: $10k/yr * avg 12 year life of kidney: $120k -> Total (and that was best case, quick transplant, no complications): AUD$522,000   Cost of pension (which you’re still being paid when you’re on dialysis anyway): $18k/yr * the same 16 years: $280k…....so even if we said “hey, you’re getting dialysis, so you don’t get a pension to live on”, it would still be cheaper to have a healthy pensioner than one with advanced diabetes, and this doesn’t take into account amputations, medicines etc etc….but as I said, they get the pension as well so your assertion is complete bunk. 

      Approximate extra cost on the system of diabetic pensioner in kidney failure:  about $522,000….total time to collate that data from the net:  about 5 minutes….showing how straight up lazy some journalists are:  Priceless

    • Carol Laggen says:

      01:31pm | 22/04/11

      I agree with Adam. Death may be cheaper than the pension but most people try to put off death including expensive operations and treatment.
      If that’s your arguement, then perhaps Obese people who choose to court death in lieu of changing eating habits (excepting those with diseases they can’t do anything about that cause obesity)  should not be given medical treatment?
      That idea seems just as ridicuous as the idea obese people aren’t costing society money.

    • Adam says:

      04:14pm | 22/04/11

      Actually, my point was that if you’re going to take a job as a journalist for an Internet based op-ed website, you should at least be able to use google…. I guess it’s a lot easier to just have an opinion rather than an informed opinion smile

      The whole article reeks of “oh man, they’re making me work on a public holiday - what junk can I make up”....way to phone it in Brendan, pride in one’s work and professional diligence is way overrated anyway.

    • Reggie says:

      01:53pm | 24/04/11

      Adam; “Hang on Brendan, are you a doctor?  Health worker?  Statistician?  Marketing or Advertising executive?  Health sector analyst or economist?  No?  None of those things?”

      I feel sure that advertising executives have no greater qualification to impinge their wares upon the great unwashed than the other. Nor do I imagine that TV advertising is vetted to see if the originators are worthy of their claims. “If they’ve got the money we’ll run it.”

      Perhaps a more direct approach may have been, “Get off your fat arse, give up smoking and read something more inspiring than Mills & furking Boon.”

      I assume you DO know how dangerous it is to go into hospital or to be treated by a doctor eh Adam? We oldies do.

      @Carol, ... ” people who choose to court death in lieu of changing (snip) habits (snip) should not be given medical treatment? 

      We could say the same about pedestrians and motor-bike riders. smile

    • Against the Man says:

      09:12am | 22/04/11

      Health and the incompetent Roxon don’t go hand in hand. Lets face it the Rudd/Gillard government is the worst this country has ever seen. I mean I can’t get ANY ALP supporters to get me a reasonable list of significant achievements from the last 5 years. Failures on the other hand we have a lot….....oh boy that 100% federal takeover of health must be around the corner huh? And a great job with the home insulation project too, death people don’t get sick huh? Oh and wonderful job with the economy, we really will appreciate all those cuts you will make in the budget just to make our lives even more difficult.

      Hey why doesn’t Roxon extand the the plain packaging idea to fast food/kid’s meals etc. Obesity and childhood obesity is a health issue isn’t it? But that might require the minister to actually do work!

      With $650 million down the drain with the over-hyped and under-delivering Not-So -Super -Clinics and no definitive health care policy in place, maybe we should get a tax-payer ad campaign to motivate our slow and sluggish federal politicians into actually doing some work.

    • Knemon says:

      12:16pm | 22/04/11

      ...“Lets face it the Rudd/Gillard government is the worst this country has ever seen” - your opinion and your entitled to it.

      The Howard / Costello government was the worst in Australian history - my opinion. So we’re square on that one, they’re as bad as each other.

      The ALP got us though the GFC in better shape than any other country on the planet - what did the LNP want to do? - nothing I hear you say.

      I often ask conservatives to give me three significant achievements that the previous LNP government gave Australia after nearly 12 years of government, and guess what? - they can’t. I can certainly list far more than three failures. We had record receipts of government revenue over that same period, 300 billion above forecasts and Costello managed to produce a surplus of 22 billion after nearly 12 years, wow, that’s economic management 101.

      A healthy body provides a healthy mind, healthy minds provide a better county for all.

      This article is written with so much conservative ideological bias, it’s actually laughable.

    • Against the Man says:

      12:34pm | 22/04/11

      Knemon, you know if that is what you want to believe in than go ahead. But those significant achievements from the Rudd/Gillard years? Remind me again please. And please explain how they got through the GFC without using the surplus the Howard gang racked up for us. Thanks for educating me and giving me the right perspective.

      Too funny. Too easy. You guys argue my points for me better than I ever could!

      ps: Remember whenever you bring up past governments to defend your point you effectively say that this government isn’t really in charge and doing a good job. Defend the current government before you bring up the past. But if you can’t defend the current government than I say thank you smile

    • TimB says:

      12:48pm | 22/04/11

      Knemon, if the ALP are so great, why are we bracing for such a shitty budget?

      The GFC is over. They got us through that you said. So there should be no excuse.

      Right?

    • Knemon says:

      01:13pm | 22/04/11

      TimB - “if the ALP are so great, why are we bracing for such a shitty budget?” -  It’s pretty simple Tim - The current government aren’t swimming in the receipts that the previous LNP government were, or squandered

      ATM - It’s not my job to defend the current government, they are doing the hard yards, something conservatives lack…as for your GFC argument - if the surplus had been larger, which it should have been, then we wouldn’t need the budgetary cuts that are now most likely. 

      The amount of money squandered by Howard and Costello was bordering on criminal.

    • Against the Man says:

      01:45pm | 22/04/11

      Knemon, absolutely brilliant, I take it you are taking the piss out of us smile

      I haven’t laughed so hard in such a while…..............doing the hard yards? HAHaHaHaHaHa….......yes that is why they have racked up record level of policy success (try zero) and debt (try more than anyone expected from the so called fiscal conservative ‘new’ ALP).

      Priceless, you Sir, serve deserve an award!

    • Likes Joining Dots says:

      02:12pm | 22/04/11

      @Knemon

      I can give you one. Paying off the 92 billion deficit they inherited from Labor. Just imagine the ‘good shape’ we would have been in during the GFC if Howard/Costello had gained office with a surplus. But that’s history and I don’t quite understand why it keeps getting raised unless it’s some form of ‘quick, look over there’ tactic.

      Regardless, it’s the ALP running the show now and they are accountable. I’m looking forward to reading the razor budget Swan has put together after nature denied him the ‘rivers of gold’ he was relying on from the same mining companies that Rudd also tried to tap for extra funds.

    • TimB says:

      02:21pm | 22/04/11

      And why don’t they have the reciepts? You said that they got us through the GFC fine. That our economy is great thanks to Labor. They should have the same reciepts the Liberals do. Why don’t they?

      Either our economy isn’t going as good as you claim, meaning that Labor aren’t the economic gurus they pretend to be, or our economy is fine and it’s just that Labor have wasted all their money.

      So which is it?

    • Knemon says:

      11:48pm | 22/04/11

      @ ATM - I’m not taking the piss out of us…I’m taking it out of you.

      @ TimB - Disappointing, I thought you were smarter than that!

    • Against the Man says:

      07:24am | 23/04/11

      Sure Knemon, because only you and I read the the Punch. Insert sarcasm here!

      Welcome to the real world loser smile

      Oh, by not denying my points on Roxon (eg superclinic, health care policy etc) I take it you agree Roxon is a dill, and for that I thank you.

    • TimB says:

      09:41am | 23/04/11

      Knemon, is that your way of saying that I’m actually right and you don’t actually have an answer to my question?

    • Chris L says:

      12:17pm | 24/04/11

      I’ve got to admit to being disappointed in this current Labor incarnation. In hindsight, after doing some research, my opinion of Keating had changed from antipathy to admiration. I don’t expect the same to happen with Gillard.

      On the other hand, many of those ridiculing the current government have nothing but admiration for the previous Howard government and that takes some serious chutzpah. How about we just agree that the last decent leadership we had ended in the mid-ninties (and that we also had some good Liberal leadership prior to that) and perhaps looks toward who might be able to do a better job after the next election. Last years poll showed us that, at the moment, it’s neither of the majors.

    • Reggie says:

      04:46pm | 24/04/11

      Knemon, “I’m not taking the piss out of us…I’m taking it out of you.”

      You are such a naughty man. Stirring these frantic people and not ONLY on a Sunday but EASTER Sunday too! I imagine our PM and her beau are enjoying time beside the pool with a few glasses of a good SA red

      Probably skinny dipping as well.  wink I wonder if they’ve BOTH got tattoos?

    • Chris Jones says:

      09:15am | 22/04/11

      I have not seen the media campaign and your article does not state the cost of it. However your point is well made, it remindes me of the keeting years when the federal labor govt would tell us each week what words we would go to jail for daring to utter. ‘Manhole’, still to this day I remember being told I could be charged for uttering ‘That manhole cover is loose, a car could loose a wheel in that’, The fact that a car could have been damaged or people hurt was ignored by the copper whilst he paid attention to the ‘crime’ I had committed. I wonder what the next ‘fad’ for this lot will be?
      Here is another thought, what agency created this? Is it another ‘labor business’ that charges overlarge comissions and ‘donates’ (read launders) 50% back to party coffers?

    • Michael says:

      10:14am | 22/04/11

      I think the problem is that the government does not actually know what it’s core functions *should* be. labor’s core funtion in government is exactly that - staying in government. Everything else is fluff and bullshit. It’s the NSW labor nightmare all over again. Everything is stats driven, artificial and media driven.

      Who cares that in the middle of the biggest economic boom in Australian history, we are sinking deeper and deeper into debt and having to make drastic cuts in our budget because “the party is over”? Can we assume that means the party is over for labor too, or is it just the rest of us who have to stop partying? What about a big new tax for CO2?

      We are in the biggest economic boom in history and tax incomes are falling, new laws to make jobs safer mean people don’t want to employ, jobs are precarious and business sentiment is poor. That’s good government right there!! A half way competent government would be leading and would make sure that our economic boom is controlled, taxes are fair and good, business is confident in the country’s management and debt and cutbacks would be a bad & distant memory.

      Instead, we have puerile TV ads driven by some 20-something year old public servant with disjointed messages targetting someone…

      The rest of Australia NEEDS to look at how badly this model failed NSW and learn from our stupidity. labor needs also to go back in time to a distant memory where the political fight did not define the politician, rather the moral strength of the politician that drove the political fight. labor is a puppet of self-interested and corrupt unions - it’s political roots are gone. It no longer represents anything or anyone but a few self-interested megalomanics.

      labor: “STOP IT - DON’T SWAP (leaders) IT!”

    • TrueOz says:

      10:35am | 22/04/11

      The balloon makes more sense than Joolya.

    • Understands big words says:

      11:35am | 22/04/11

      Some day you will be old enough to understand. Until then, you will just have to trust the grown-ups

    • persephone says:

      10:37am | 22/04/11

      Obese people don’t just conveniently up and die one day without previously incurring any health costs, as your ignorant comment states.

      The cost of obesity to Australia is $21 BILLION a year:

      http://www.usyd.edu.au/news/84.html?newsstoryid=4556

      ‘The figures relate to health care costs such as hospitalisation, medical care and medications and do not include the annual $35.7 billion in government subsidies that overweight and obese people receive.’

      So in fact it’s over $50 billion.

      ‘The imperative to lose weight is clear because the research shows the cost was lower in overweight or obese people who lost weight or reduced weight circumference compared with those who progressed to or remained obese.”

      So any weight loss is beneficial.

      Adam Smith, the great libertarian philosopher, made it clear that an individual’s rights should only be sacrosant where they do not impact on other individuals.

      In this case, obese people are costing taxpayers - other individuals - large amounts of money.

      They are using health services which could be used for other purposes.

      A few ads telling people it’s really not a good idea to be fat doesn’t seem an over reaction in the light of this information.

    • Against the Man says:

      11:33am | 22/04/11

      I agree being fat is bad for the health service. But is an ad telling people they are fat and it isn’t a good idea really going to be effective? I mean if you haven’t realised being fat isn’t good, you might have other issues.

      Why not:
      - Make healthy food cheaper
      - Make unhealthy food more expensive
      - Reduce promotion of unhealthy food
      - Reward people who make the effort to be healthy (yearly health check tick from their doctor) pay less medicare levy/private health insurance
      - Healthy food in school

      Okay my link below might be a lil’ cruel:
      http://blogs.blackvoices.com/2011/04/21/all-as-bs-and-bmis-more-schools-including-weight-on-report/

      but reward the healthy and provide a reason to be healthy because some people might lose the weight if it is too expensive to keep it on.

      Which is why I think this health minister is a dill, she doesn’t look at the big picture and only makes a token effort to get publicity.

    • Shifter says:

      11:40am | 22/04/11

      Why, and what sort of subsidies do obese people receive to make up this $35.7 billion?

    • Adam says:

      11:45am | 22/04/11

      @ Pers - You make a great argument for abolishing medicare, privatising all healthcare and letting the free market provide instead. That way each individual would be responsible for their own healthcare costs. No more lazy obese individual X getting subsidised by healthy happy taxpayer Y. Sounds more equitable to me smile

    • Matt says:

      11:58am | 22/04/11

      Make healthcare into a user-pays system then. smile And get rid of the dole while you’re at it, as well as any other welfare in place. We can’t have these people impacting on other individuals by costing taxpayers large amounts of money, can we?

      The real world is a bit more complex than sweeping generalisations, persephone.

    • JT says:

      12:18pm | 22/04/11

      ‘‘Adam Smith, the great libertarian philosopher, made it clear that an individual’s rights should only be sacrosant where they do not impact on other individuals.

      In this case, obese people are costing taxpayers - other individuals - large amounts of money.’‘

      Well as a Labor ideologue, you are costing me as a taxpayer large amounts of money by continually voting in the Labor Party. Their incompetence and failures in every aspect of running the country has cost me dearly and will continue to cost until they are kicked out. Therefore you as a person responsible for inflicting this pain on the taxpayers should be stripped of your right to vote. Simple. Or you know, the government could just GTFO of how Australians live their lives.

      P.S. I’m thin.

    • persephone says:

      04:36pm | 22/04/11

      I wondered exactly how posters here were going to spin this into a political statement!

      AtM

      what, for doing exactly the sort of thing all health ministers have done for decades?

      Shifter

      I don’t know, I didn’t do the research.

      Adam

      actually, I don’t. Not all health problems are caused by an individual’s behaviour - in fact, most of them aren’t.

      And even the healthiest can find ourselves in situations where we require very expensive health care.

      A system where this kind of health care is equally available to the rich and the poor is fine by me - and is cheaper to society as a whole, and thus the taxpayer (compare Australian and USA health costs versus outcomes).

      JT

      No, I probably helped save your job, or at least the jobs of some of those near to you.

      I helped sustain the economic health of this country in the light of one of the greatest financial collapses in recent times.

      That’s why we can afford to sit around talking about people’s fatness, rather than worrying about the number of unemployed, or which industry is going to collapse next, or how we’re going to feed our families next week.

      What’s more, this is a government which is setting Australia up in the long term - improving health services, strengthening the tax base, tackling challenges such as climate change, and generally making decisions on the basis of sound research, rather than running short sighted and ultimately destructive fear campaigns.

      You can’t afford not to have me.

    • David C says:

      06:54pm | 22/04/11

      how mucn of thoe costs are genetic anyway? and subsidies???

    • Against the Man says:

      08:42pm | 22/04/11

      Sorry dude, I only care about what the current since ‘07 health minister is doing, especially since this comes out of tax monies not her pay check. You might not like it but that is the reality. Unless you can tell me otherwise how roxon is an excellent minister and some of her excellent achievements.

      I agree fat isn’t good but how we cut the fat with OUR tax dollars isn’t all that better!

    • persephone says:

      07:53am | 23/04/11

      AtM

      well, firstly, at the moment you’re paying less tax than you have for several years, so they’re obviously doing well in that department.

      And spending less on advertising, as well, so another point.

      As for Roxon’s achievements: she’s introduced major health reforms, taken on the tobacco industry, introduced taxes on alcopops (which has led to a decrease in binge drinking), increased hospital funding by 50%, set up new cancer centres and introduced GP superclinics, created thousands of new training places for nurses and medical students and provided free dental checks for teenagers.

      As a result, there has been an increase in the amount of elective surgery performed - which has led to a drop in waiting lists. There are more doctors and nurses working in public hospitals than ever before.

      Fine, you think she’s a bad Health Minister.

      Outline one with a better record at this stage of their career.

    • TimB says:

      09:39am | 23/04/11

      “well, firstly, at the moment you’re paying less tax than you have for several years, so they’re obviously doing well in that department.”

      You might have a point Perse, but I’m sure you know that those tax cuts were *Liberal* tax cuts. They had them in the budget before 2007. Labor just kept going with them.
      The last Liberal budgeted cut came in last year. And by all accounts there won’t be any this year. Wonder why that is.

      Typical Labor,  taking credit for the previous governments accomplishments.

    • Against the Man says:

      10:29am | 23/04/11

      Ok here we go again

      1) Tobacco/Alcohol reform weren’t that impressive, she could have done more, so far token efforts, last check the binge drinkings/teen drinking rates haven’t dropped
      2) The SuperClinics are a Super Rort! $650 million and we haven’t seen the equivalent results. Come on dude, she is throwing money at doctors/allied health to staff some of these centres but not getting equivalent returns! Do the math! Epic/expensive fail!
      3) More new jobs for nurses/doctors! HaHa try getting a job as a RN in a NSW hospital, good luck! Oh and you have seen my numerous links on unemployed medical grads and the increasing numbers we are to expect! Yes, unemployed and untrained doctors in a country with a doctor shortage.
      4) She has added more layers to health, and Medicare has never been so stretched - have we anything to show for it?

      And elective surgery drops go in cycles and the State governments implement those policies to get things going, money might come from the Federal level but really State governments (the ALP drones that recently got booted out did it due to public pressure) essentially are responsible. But like I said it goes in cycles and Roxon doesn’t or can’t control it. With up coming budget cuts the States will have to fend for themselves.

      And strange this Minister is happy to provide medical provider numbers and indemnity to nurses/midwives but not doctors. Yup no personal agenda there.

    • persephone says:

      10:39am | 23/04/11

      All governments do that, TimB.

      Howard’s economic achievements were largely built on Keating’s.

      Thus, using your argument, Labor can take full credit for not only our present economic health, but our good performances throughout the Howard years.

    • Bob says:

      11:37am | 22/04/11

      Quote:“But the obese aren’t a great burden on the government’s finances—simply because unhealthy people tend to die prematurely.”  Well, I beg to differ- anyone who works in Intensive Care Units in hospitals knows the cost of the equipment and staffing to work on the obese, who present in large numbers with the conditions that go along with, and correlate with obesity. They are using up these expensive resources, and queue up to do so, even if they die younger!

    • Allan Dunbar says:

      12:12pm | 22/04/11

      You miss the point.  Which is mindfulness.

      Most people are aware, when you discuss it, of what constitutes healthy and unhealthy.  There is a wealth of information out there about healthy eating.

      The main area where people fall down is being aware all the time.  Campaigns like this serve as a reminder.

      But I agree it’s rude and juvenile, but the sentiment is in the right place.

    • Judas says:

      12:25pm | 22/04/11

      Personally, I think that the obese should be banned from using lifts and escalators when there are stairs available.

      We should have obesity inspectors roaming the cities, fining obese people for being lazy.

      We should also implement a “responsible service” policy, such as liquor and gaming establishments have been forced to take up.

      Takeaway stores should be required to refuse the service of unhealthy, fatty food to the obese.

      Actually, bugger it - I think that the obese should be paid in food stamps that can only be redeemed at fruit and vegetable stores. Either that, or sold to the Japanese for “scientific research”.

      At the very least, they should be forced to refrain from wearing tight clothing and especially those really short shorts that are now in fashion.

      I really don’t like having beautiful sunny days ruined by the sight of the layers of excess fatty tissue spilling forth from ‘neath the high cut denim.

    • Kayte says:

      12:34pm | 22/04/11

      “But diet and exercise is a personal choice and I would be staggered if anyone adopted a healthier lifestyle because the government tells them to.”
      Is the “Quit Smoking” campaigns funded by government?  I’m pretty sure everyone knows that smoking is bad for you, but we still all have to watch filthly footage of clotted aterties on our televisions.  Are these ads ineffective because the government is funding them?

      In case you didn’t know, in Australia we have free or near free health care.  All funded by the government.  The government is well within it’s rights to advertise against obesity.  It’s in the taxpayers interests.  I’m as offended by a blue bubble man telling me about loosing weight as I am about a dancing flower selling me financial products.  It’s not offensive it’s effective advertising.

    • nossy says:

      01:06pm | 22/04/11

      Happy Easter everyone and happy Easter also to Tony Abbott without whos ongoing assistance the ALP would find it hard to remain in office !  hahahahah

    • Knemon says:

      12:23am | 23/04/11

      Why thank you nossy, I just played a diddle on my fiddle,

      The banjo’s are startin’’  to rip - the pigs are about to squeal.

      I’m havin’ a hoe down conservative rippin’ time.

    • Bikinis On Top says:

      01:18pm | 22/04/11

      Your comment:
      On Good Friday, one should eat fish and not meat.
      One should exercise by walking around the Easter Show many many time.
      One should then sleep through Friday Night Football.

    • Bikinis On Top says:

      01:22pm | 22/04/11

      If Tasmania is Green, then The Apple Isle could be known as the Granny Smith Isle.
      It wouldn’t matter if it was light green or dark green.

    • Kelvin says:

      01:23pm | 22/04/11

      If Roxon really wanted to help stop people dying from cancer she would not have terminated the National Bowel Cancer Screening Program last December.  This program by the Health and Ageing department’s own web site would save 1300 lives this year alone. That it is no longer active is a disgrace and she should hang her head in shame.

      It seems that anything other than printing glossy brochures, commissioning expensive advertising campaigns and launching web sites that are most often misguided and useless is too had for Roxon and her department. The same mob that gave us Eric.

    • Bikinis on Top says:

      01:25pm | 22/04/11

      You cannot have a big Australia without obesity.
      Without obesity, you only have a small Australia.

    • stephen says:

      05:37pm | 22/04/11

      How far up is that bikini mate ?
      Around your neck yet ?

    • Chris L says:

      12:21pm | 24/04/11

      How about a curvy Australia? I think that sounds good.

    • Scott Davis says:

      02:07pm | 22/04/11

      Factual Error - obese people do not just “die earlier”. They suffer from multiple health problems that lead to increased demand on health services. Healthy old people do not drain health resources. Why? Because they are healthy.  They live longer, and have short periods of ill health before death. That being said, patronising ads are not the answer.
      Reducing the cost of healthy fresh foods and making the extensive advertising of unhealthy foods to children more difficult would be a better option. Maybe a fat/sugar content tax on processed foods that reflects the health impact would fit - then watch the companies that make huge profits spin it, just like they do with tobacco. Eat what you like, just don’t expect everyone else to pay for it.

    • David C says:

      11:33pm | 22/04/11

      the vast majority of your health costs will occur in the last year of your life.
      Fat people pay taxes as well?
      Are you going to tax high calorie desserts at fancy restaurants as well?

    • Hambone says:

      02:15pm | 22/04/11

      Plenty of comments here from thin people who don’t quite understand that maybe some fat people don’t want to be fat. I was fat from about age eight and have plenty of memories of being sat down in front of a shearers size meal with the knowledge I wasn’t allowed to leave until my plate was clean. I’ve been trying to lose the weight ever since I moved out and am now on a 1200 calorie intake. I’ve stopped it not swapped it & 2 hrs exercise/day is having some impact, yet I still have skinny people look down their noses at me because I am ‘obviously’ stuffing my face at every meal.
      What I want you twigs to do this weekend is get two backpacks full of bricks wear one on the front and one on the back and see how well you do after climbing a couple of flights of stairs or a ten minute jog.
      Totally agree with Judas on the tight clothing though, urggghhhhh cant ever picture myself in anything that shows any body lines and don’t know how fat people can walk around in ... gag… spandex!

    • JT says:

      03:05pm | 22/04/11

      Losing weight is not rocket science. You eat less per day than you’re body needs to maintain itself. Once you do that, your body will start burning your fat to acquire the needed energy. Exercise will help the process along.

    • Adam says:

      04:24pm | 22/04/11

      Article aside - well done smile. Stick with it….it’ll take a long time and can be hard as hell but will add years to your life and vastly improve your quality of life.  Don’t give up, keep running every day, eating healthy fresh veggies (go vego for a bit and you’ll lose heaps)....good on you for not accepting the bounds of your youth smile

    • Reggie says:

      02:19pm | 24/04/11

      JT “Losing weight is not rocket science.”

      Spoken like one who has never had to face the tendency of the body to go into starvation shut-down rather than convert fat into energy. 

      Cut your computer time in half and move around like the adds say, in other words, “shift your fat arse” but don’t run or screw up your knees and feet, leave that to the gym obsessives. “Eat Less and Move More.”

    • Janie says:

      02:54pm | 22/04/11

      I like the campaign! You have to admit it takes a positive approach (suggests what you CAN do; it’s not all “you’re gonna die); gets your attention (heh! it’s blue balloon man!). There is a role for the govt to play in public health promotion.

    • Old Bert says:

      05:30pm | 22/04/11

      Obesity has never been an open topic of discussion by age pensioners. Sexual deviation is a matter for the law. Go look at the ABC online if you want that sort of thing.

    • Ivory Tower says:

      06:46pm | 22/04/11

      The less fat people in the mix, the less tax I pay to repair them when they start falling apart earlier and more dramatically. This is a preventative measure. I think this soft approach isn’t enough, in fact I would encourage a more fascist approach to our society which presently seems to want to normalize being disgustingly obese. Obesity is to our society what nicotine addiction was 20 years ago. It needs to be stopped.

    • David C says:

      11:36pm | 22/04/11

      so is your next target kids that play sport and get injured? and what about people that go ouside on a cold day without a scarf?
      I guess next on your list will be people with genetic dispositions that burden the health system

    • Bob says:

      11:38pm | 22/04/11

      agree with you; some personal freedoms need to be removed from obese people: e.g. food stamps that limit the amount of takeaway/junk purchased; surcharges on hospital fees and insurances—but maybe also provide financial incentives and rebates to those who stay fairly fit

    • Ryan says:

      02:04am | 23/04/11

      @Bob: communist much? Holy cow whatever next, some sort of internet monitoring that tells you when you are allowed to go for a crap.
      You commies sure are one screwed up bunch.

    • Rob says:

      07:29pm | 22/04/11

      Hambone it’s about tax not you
      The US have tried this same attack as it worked with smoking , it started 2 years ago in were else California and 2 months ago they tried putting extra tax on soft drinks and sweet . They are the big volume sellers like cigs .
      This properganda that you will live longer and cost us less is rubbish the only thing that has extended our lives is medical research .
      This propaganda divides families friends and country.
      The biggest growth industry in Califonia is medical pot , but the rest of the US it’s banned.
      I think Roxan and Gillard should make there Medicials public , these people who claim these habits have an impact on there lives will soon want the mentally sick and handicap should be taxed .

    • Darryl says:

      07:55pm | 22/04/11

      Brendan, most of what governments do these days is reactive. So, in seeing for once, something which I believe is proactive, I am delighted. I think the smaller portions and sometimes instead of often concepts are good, simple concepts which are not regularly explained to people trying to lose weight and generally, much of the advice available from other parties is only provided as part of a programme where the person is asked to sign up for hundreds of dollars of other products. In this case, the Federal Government deserves congratulations for its efforts.

    • NESLIHAN KUROSAWA says:

      11:47pm | 22/04/11

      Hi Punch Team,

      For me personally, especially during Religious holidays like Easter & Christmas, we should consider all others who seem to be less fortunate than ourselves.  Somehow in reality,  we all should consume less calories, drink less alcohol, pay more attention to our living environment and most importantly try to work on having peace in our world, rather than living with the constant fear of a war!! 

      Easier said than done, really!!  Can we do all that by thinking and living globally??  And also admit to ourselves that we are all part of this global village??  With all the comforts of the latest technology at our finger tips, what is making us so restless and uneasy about the future of our planet??  I only presume that the right answers are right underneath our noses and waiting to be discovered!!  Best regards to your editors.

    • malohi says:

      09:03am | 23/04/11

      I thought we were supposed to be remembering that tale of someone dying and rising from the dead to teach society a lesson.
      I think it was a zombie flick or something.

      Ah the irony, especially during religious holidays, where the evils of society should be set aside for the sacred wisdon of religion we should “try to work on having peace in our world, rather than living with the constant fear of a war”
      I would say for most people that the constant fear of war stems from the religious fanatics in this world,
      Fanatasism that may show initial symptoms like finding a way to spread religious propaganda in a obesity thread.
      Smoking, obesety and religion, three vices we could all work toward eradicating, that would be truly deserving of a holiday.

    • Forgotten Australian Family says:

      10:43am | 23/04/11

      Here is what hurts the most.  Our child suffered from her father’s childhood institutional abuse and became mentally injured, needing drugs which piled weight on her. Now she is suicidal because she feels unacceptable when she is fat. The State did this to her. What right does the State have to ask her to lose weight?

    • Missy says:

      12:30pm | 23/04/11

      How did “the state” do this to her? I think it is quite obvious that her father did it to her while her mother stood back?

    • Alicia says:

      05:44pm | 23/04/11

      Missy, I think the poster means that the State has made her feel guilty for being fat - hence the suicidal thoughts. But its a load of crap anyway, the State doesn’t make me feel bad for being fat. The media does but I don’t really care!

    • Libby says:

      09:04pm | 23/04/11

      Missy, your comments are horrible - you have maligned this woman because you assume she must have ‘stood back’ whilst some obviously horrible things were going on.  How are you to know what she did or didn’t do, what she was or wasnt aware of?
      That said, i dont necessarily think that the state has an automatic duty to make reparations for some potentially unforeseeable consequence of previous misguided (and at times, disgusting) policies.
      I think that the commenter intended to highlight the difficulties of singling fat people out for punishment on the assumption that its all their own doing when we dont always know all the circumstances.
      To all those advocating a user pays system on the basis of weight - have you considered how damaging your comments might be to a fragile young girl such as this and how this type of discrimination might cause her to abandon much needed medication so she is not seen by her peers to simply be an overeater with no self control?

    • Rose says:

      08:42pm | 23/04/11

      ‘The state’ had a duty of care only now seen though seriously abused this man and now family by abusing the child’s Father in the first place. The Mother not having a clue as to what ‘really happened’ to her husband much of his life. She also would be caught up with her own maturing life such as child care and work and other day to day issues like survival. I would hope people are a more pleasant judge of you if you are ever in need but then we all have our ability or understanding curve yet. After all we all need care no matter or does this only apply to a few lucky dippers in life who play judge . Seems so….
      I cannot believe this nonsense on weight. We have many ill people suffering several varieties of illnesses including emotionally charged and seriously life threatening. Has any here been in a hospital to see what eg happens to chemical treated people say as cancer does to people including children. Well they retain fluid or because their kidney malfunction they look FAT.
      Some like Forgotten Australian Family’s daughter would be suffering from medications these are chemically ‘see poisons’ induced by medications adds to depressions etc. Look on google for what these can insure patients often will suffer to take them, over a long period of time this will lead to DEATH.
      When parents are advised by trained medical personal to take this crap oh medication what can they do, or suffer accusations such as these here. See note ADHD children. See medications for most illnesses and SIDE EFFECTS.
      As another add might say feeling bloated from taking medications, eat this yoghurt. Considering the well of information on the fact that it is often full of sugar or fake sugar, additives etc. Which is as bad or worse for good health. Adding to say diabetes amongst other health issues. Never mind allergy to milk and other additives on health.
      What about metabolism. Each person has different rate. Thyroid function, hormones needs etc. Poisons change this see 245t eg. Agent Orange, and other colours and it’s variety of health problems.

    • malohi says:

      10:13am | 24/04/11

      All your strawmen and excuses do not change the chemistry or the physics.
      Just burn more energy through exercise than you take in through eating.
      Unless someone is physically cramming food in your mouth all the excuses in the world will not stop the blame from laying with yourself (or perhaps more appropriately, with a childs parents).
      Slower metablism?- excersice more- eat smaller and more frequently.
      Water retention LOL, even it the worse cases it could not make someone sem obese.

      But Im sure you wont listen, you try so hard to avoid this fact, even crafting paragraphs of psuedoscientific excuses.
      No wonder the government has to try to step in and attempt to get the message through.

    • Rose says:

      11:54am | 24/04/11

      If the government is so fired up about helping people why then has it taken the tax and said not one word? Why have over 500,000 ‘Forgotten Australians’ had so little public support and although an Apology was given to them. Many still are suffering homelessness and severe ill health.

      Fluid retention is caused by heart disease some by family history and many by abuses by Government and Christian Carers. .

      Amongst other diseases and illnesses such persons suffer which includes Rheumatoid Arthritis. Lack of medical care by the STATE and religious carers who get paid retaining money not for the care of children at all. As does Aged Care feeding on $2.00 a day.

      Those who experienced this ‘Government and Religous Corporatives’ as children this ‘care personal’ who had duty of care to children. Instead for many of these persons… from their childhood abuses by such abusive care suffer greatly, these include poor self love and care, dental care, starvation, to beatings to incarceration and little education to earn a lifestyle such is lived today by some here. Even when they do this abuse crap over comes their life eventually more often than such care shown here..Many are in fact are dead thanks to abuses others dished out as their prime right to do this to children and young adults. Many drugged had their children stolen from them after birth, lied to and dumped to the streets. See Currant Senate Inquiry into Adoption..

      See reasons for other weight as ‘Ghost in the Genes’. Starvation by past family appears to leave a lasting effect in later generations as do many diseases.
      So foolishness now qualified by some here that one must choose parents background is now up for additional excuses here to lay blame.
      Please see to your values.
      Oh and many also suffered this as children shoveling food into our mouth dahh. I well remember my gums near bleeding and the scrap of metal on my teeth. Vomit and you ate that force feeding that also. You learn to force feed yourself dahh. I worry for my children and theirs.
      I frankly can not eat. Add stress to now diabetes and see how you might take it where it was shuved for many these children.

    • SimpleSimon says:

      11:41pm | 23/04/11

      Wow, I’ve read some rubbish in my time, but this is surely up there with the worst of it. Criticizing the government for promoting a healthier lifestyle?? If you were just criticizing the balloon man, but supported the message in general, that could possibly have made a reasonable article, but instead you’ve just come across as another of these morons who need to complain about everything Labor does regardless of the message, delivery, or intent. I’m sorry, but the ignorant complaints overshadow and void the credibility of anything even remotely sensible in this piece.

    • Chris L says:

      12:28pm | 24/04/11

      Agreed. The lazyness is apparent when they resort to criticizing the insulation (it wasn’t Labor MPs doing the installing, the deaths were caused by businesses not following lawful directives) and the BER (some overpriced buildings, but at least the schools got something from this government).

      If you want to criticise Labor it isn’t that difficult. Take on the Internet Censorship plan (if you don’t intend the Coalition to be able to use it later) or criticise the floundering about with offshore detention. Hell, do a little research and tell us something we haven’t heard before.

      Lazy author!

    • Salad Days says:

      10:03am | 24/04/11

      Tax all food with too much sugar and salt a good idea but better still, take out the salt and sugar to a healthy limit.  Food manufacturers are getting away with murder but so are the parents who let their kids eat too much junk food.

    • Reggie says:

      02:40pm | 24/04/11

      A bit draconian but I think you’re right.

      I’ve recently had to watch my salt intake so I make it simple by looking only at the Sodium per 100 grams of the food.

      I am AMAZED at the variation.  I try and choose the few foods that are 20 to 30 mg per 100 grams but the range is nothing short of HORRIFIC. Breakfast cereal and mayonnaise with typical figures in the 980 to 1400 or 2000 mg per 100gms. It seems to me that a lot of these foods simply could not last without the excessive salt levels.

      Assuming that people like the taste of salt, this liking enables the manufacturers to market foods that would otherwise NOT be marketable.  Potato crisps for example are reconstituted forms of the starch that is the glue obtained from potatoes with added salt and flavour to make them more palatable.  Worse than sugar for causing tooth decay.

    • Amy says:

      11:28am | 27/04/11

      I like the campaign, it’s less offensive than telling me to eat carrot sticks while power runningt. I thought the swap it idea was good, the less you shove hard dieting in overweight people’s faces, the more likely they are to give it a go. Trying to convince an obese nation to lose weight is tricky, this campaign is a good start smile

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @BenFordham: Kevin Rudd says his colleagues see him as the "best prospect" to save the ALP.

Anthony Sharwood

Meanwhile, in the real world, hard-working Australians pack the kids' lunches and bundle them off to school #Ruddvenge#Auspol

Daniel Piotrowski

And @_Tors on Labor's scorched earth shenanigans http://t.co/E9I69dG5

Daniel Piotrowski

Malcolm Farr on what a Rudd administration would look like http://t.co/MSwM7ZWR

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Live blog: Gillard’s press conference

Live blog: Gillard’s press conference

Julia Gillard will give a press conference at 9.30am Eastern Time to respond to Kevin Rudd’s shock…

A sneak preview of PM Kevin Rudd Mark II

A sneak preview of PM Kevin Rudd Mark II

After modest carousing following his second elevation to Prime Minister - no more than half an hour -…

Scorched earth is all that will remain if they keep this up

Scorched earth is all that will remain if they keep this up

Never underestimate the furiously protective streak of an adult daughter towards her father. Last night…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Australia, we’re a bunch of heartless travel snobs

Justin says:

My 2 cents worth, If you feel the need to belittle other peoples holidays/methods of travel/experiences/destinations/restaurants they choose etc etc, then you should probably take a look at yourself in the mirror as well. People should be free to travel as they can best afford, best suits… [read more]

From: This Sally’s no lay down, she’s a lay down misère

Jacques Meoff says:

"Why can't we have more athletes like Sally Pearson?" The answer is actually pretty simple, notwithstanding the simple fact that she is an incredible athlete, the AIS pour 99 percent of their money into supporting the swimmers. Unless you form part of that team you fund yourself to train, travel and… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

No wuckin forries. These nuckin futs are tuckin fops

No wuckin forries. These nuckin futs are tuckin fops

Well, puck me with a fitchfork. The F-word is apparently an acceptable part of Australian speech. That’s… Read more

160 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter