Poll

10 votes (18.86%)
10 votes (18.86%)
31 votes (58.49%)
2 votes (3.77%)

53 members have voted

AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 227
  • Posts: 12414
February 5th, 2014 at 8:53:53 AM permalink
Quote: AcesAndEights


I recently heard of a study (didn't read it myself, so this is second-hand) that smokers actually end up spending less on health care of the span of their life because they die earlier. Healthier folk live longer, into their 70s and 80s, so even though they have fewer health problems in their younger and middle-age years, they end up spending more on the back end.

I will try to dig up any evidence on this, but to me it passes the smell test.



I remember hearing this during the MSA talks in 1997. It was a point the tobacco companies could not bring up even though it was seemingly true.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
gpac1377
gpac1377
Joined: Apr 7, 2013
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 676
February 5th, 2014 at 9:01:01 AM permalink
Quote: Gandler

They are probably hoping it will benefit them years down the road when hardly anyone smokes anymore.


If I owned company shares, I'm not sure I'd be pleased about planning for an event that will occur several million years in the future.

For what it's worth, in today's trading CVS is down 1.5%. Walgreen (WAG) and Rite Aid (RAD) are each up about 1.5%.
"Scientists tell us that the fastest animal on earth, with a top speed of 120 feet per second, is a cow that has been dropped out of a helicopter."
Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 1558
February 5th, 2014 at 9:03:17 AM permalink
Quote: Face

Quote: AcesAndEights

I recently heard of a study (didn't read it myself, so this is second-hand) that smokers actually end up spending less on health care of the span of their life because they die earlier. Healthier folk live longer, into their 70s and 80s, so even though they have fewer health problems in their younger and middle-age years, they end up spending more on the back end.

I will try to dig up any evidence on this, but to me it passes the smell test.



Not only that, but decreased life span also lessens the drain on Social Security and reduces the use of valuable resources, not to mention the tons of money smokers pump into social and healthcare programs by way of taxes.

Hold your applause, it's the least I could do ;)


Yes smoking is excellent for governments, the more people who smoke the more money they save. If America still had the same smoking rates as the 1930s social security and pension reforms would likley not be an issue.
Not too long ago a big tobacco company (I think Altria) did a study for a South American government when they were considering banning smoking ads and demonstrated how much money they will save by encouraging smoking. And then add absurd per pack taxes and cigarettes become hugely profitable.
If every smoker in America quit overnight our country would be in serious trouble.
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
February 5th, 2014 at 9:28:05 AM permalink
Quote: treetopbuddy

Another great post by FleaStiff.....your one smart dude.

Not really. All smoking bans and enforcement of them are political decisions and such decisions are not always based on sufficiently studied evidence.

Many smoking bans have lead to enhanced economic experiences for bar owners despite bar owners being the most vigorous opponents of such legislation. We don't really know enough to properly link genes to gross behavior traits but we do have some data. The problem is also whether you classify gambling as risky or impulsive behavior. Its sort of like sky diving. The only risk is in the landing and its hardly "impulsive" to get dressed in an orange jump suit, don your chute and fly up to altitude Some people like epinephrine but want more of it.

All we know is that certain gene groupings do seem to cluster around certain behaviors that most people define as risky such as speeding or illegal drug use.

If it is later found that despite there being some non-smoking gamblers the overwhelming majority of gamblers both smoke and share a particular genetic mutation, then we can revisit some of the legislation.

We allow drinking but we only allow lower and lower amounts of alcohol in the blood. Are we going to have puff testing someday?
treetopbuddy
treetopbuddy
Joined: Jan 12, 2013
  • Threads: 34
  • Posts: 1739
February 5th, 2014 at 9:44:25 AM permalink
Quote: Face

Quote: AcesAndEights

I recently heard of a study (didn't read it myself, so this is second-hand) that smokers actually end up spending less on health care of the span of their life because they die earlier. Healthier folk live longer, into their 70s and 80s, so even though they have fewer health problems in their younger and middle-age years, they end up spending more on the back end.

I will try to dig up any evidence on this, but to me it passes the smell test.



Not only that, but decreased life span also lessens the drain on Social Security and reduces the use of valuable resources, not to mention the tons of money smokers pump into social and healthcare programs by way of taxes.

Hold your applause, it's the least I could do ;)



I believe your correct. Smokers die younger........It could be argued that smokers are unsung hero's. The value smokers create can't be overstated. Celebrating the smoker would be the right thing to do.... maybe a National Day for Smokers?
Each day is better than the next
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
February 5th, 2014 at 10:20:08 AM permalink
Actually its not quite true.

We measure emphysema costs virtually all of which are attributable to smokers but smokers die of other diseases too and have medical costs well before they start hacking away all day.

Alot of hotels and office buildings are non smoking and they went that way for business reasons involving cleaning rather than legislation or politics.

How much lost productivity do you want to chalk up to the effects of inhaled carbon monoxide? Do you want to charge the last two hours a day of a computer programmer at a high rate to "smoking costs" because you have to pay him for less productive work?
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
  • Threads: 227
  • Posts: 12414
February 5th, 2014 at 10:25:52 AM permalink
Quote: Gandler


Yes smoking is excellent for governments, the more people who smoke the more money they save. If America still had the same smoking rates as the 1930s social security and pension reforms would likley not be an issue.



If not for smoking the entire British Colonies might not have been near as prosperous. For sure George Washington and others would not have been nearly as wealthy and thus not likely to be able to revolt. Tobacco has built many an empire.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
Gandler
Gandler
Joined: Jan 27, 2014
  • Threads: 32
  • Posts: 1558
February 5th, 2014 at 11:09:34 AM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

If not for smoking the entire British Colonies might not have been near as prosperous. For sure George Washington and others would not have been nearly as wealthy and thus not likely to be able to revolt. Tobacco has built many an empire.


Yea the only reason we (as American) even exist at all is because of tobacco. If not for tobacco farming Europeans would have never settled here. That was (and still is) Americas most valuable and worthwhile crop to be grown here (well corn may be higher now). Jamestown was founded for tobacco. Tobacco did not exist in Europe which is why it was so exclusive here (Christopher Columbus and his crew were the first European smokers).
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
February 6th, 2014 at 12:56:58 AM permalink
Well, the British forcing China to buy opium was more profitable than our tobacco trade but its quite true that tobacco was a major product. Many early Americans made fortunes in Naval Stores a category that included hemp, canons, etc. Many of the sales were in Madagascar and of course the only buyers were pirate vessels.

Innovations in shipping were driven by the China tea trade, England wanting its tea fresh.

China ended its opium problem by making growing or posessing opium an un=appealable death penalty.
rudeboyoi
rudeboyoi
Joined: Mar 28, 2010
  • Threads: 27
  • Posts: 2001
February 6th, 2014 at 1:14:09 AM permalink
Quote: Gandler

Yea the only reason we (as American) even exist at all is because of tobacco. If not for tobacco farming Europeans would have never settled here. That was (and still is) Americas most valuable and worthwhile crop to be grown here (well corn may be higher now). Jamestown was founded for tobacco. Tobacco did not exist in Europe which is why it was so exclusive here (Christopher Columbus and his crew were the first European smokers).



What about soybean? I'm from Indiana and i am used to seeing tons of corn and soybean fields. Farmers would rotate growing the two crops.

  • Jump to: