Why don't we calculate the indirect cost of smoking, like all the diseases smokers get by being less healthy??

Question

There are the ailments directly blamed on smoking, but we should not forget that the weak smoker's body is more likely to catch almost any disease that is going around. And he is bad for the economy, since he is mentally less sound, less focused, less acceptable to other workers (nervous, stinky breath), and more likely to be absent form work.

Answer 1

We do calculate it.

http://www.google.com/search?q=health+care+costs+of+smoking&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7DMUS

Answer 2

Sorry to hear that you don't like smoking. I don't like when I go to a bar and the music is blaring so loud I can't hear my self think. It hurts my ears. Should we outlaw that on the grounds that people are going deaf? Or because it's irritating? Of course not because both of those claims are weak. Just because you don't like something, doesn't mean we should make a law against a product/activity that is already legal. And yes there are health risks that go with smoking, and even second hand smoke. However, is the threat of second hand smoke that imminent to public health that we should outlaw it everywhere? No. Last time I checked, you have the ability to choose to go into a private business that has smoking. Just like I have the ability to choose to go into a private business with loud music. If it's something I don't like, I go somewhere else. And saying it's bad for the economy is just plain ignorant. Tobacco is taxed extremely heavily. In the 2005 , the federal government alone took in almost $8 billion dollars. And if you're going to say that it doesn't offset the cost in health risks, you're wrong. Studies have already shown the amount that smokers pay in taxes far outweighs the health costs, and that money also subsidizes care for non-smokers. But yeah, you're right, maybe we should do something about this societal evil because it's so stinky.

Answer 3

You should check your "facts." Smoking actually speeds up brain function. As for smokers being less healthy, why force them outside in all sorts of weather if you're concerned about their health? Stinky? Yes, smoke clings to skin and clothing, but I suggest you keep firefighters away too. As for you not wanting to be around smokers, they probably would be just as happy not to be around you, either. Now, let's examine the tax situation. Half of one percent of the federal government's income comes from tobacco taxes. What do you want to cut from the budget? Several states settled with the tobacco industry for billions of dollars which they said would go toward health care, quitting smoking help, and preventive programs. Name two that have actually done as they said they would. It kind of makes you wonder if the tobacco industry isn't more honest than the opponents to smoking.

Answer 4

And why not make them all wear a star so we know who they are - and ban all smokers from the armed forces 'cos they're not fit enough even though most smoke!! Round them up and concentrate them in one place. Do the same with alcoholics and the obese 'cos they cost too much to keep - then the sick and frail. That way it will cost those who are never ill nothing to subsidise those who are - until they get sick and are "removed" from society.

Better still - let's all just lay down & die.

Answer 5

so you don't like smoking....yippie doo for you.

I am not a smoker but I am so sick of this witch hunt which says we have to love and tolerate everyone...except smokers. It is ok to deny them rights, charge them unfair taxes, attack them, make laws to deny smokers the right to defend their views.

Seriously I am for helping people be healthy but society is, once again, going way overboard and showing that we have no capacity for reason and moderation.

What's next? "Smoke and we shoot you in the face with a bazooka, because we care about health". Sheesh...can we get a little more intrusive into peoples' lives? I can still crap in peace...maybe someone should be working on getting police to watch me poop.


PATRICIA MS> Maybe if you are like 80 years old but otherwise it was common knowledge that they were addictive and smokers have to accept responsibility for choosing to smoke.

Answer 6

Friend,
I ride a bike from 300 -500 miles a week,
I swim 3 days a week at least 3-5 miles each time.
I can outwork most people half my age.
Guess what? I smoke. So go pick on a group of people you can prove your rant with.
I have never missed a day of work in my life do to your stated illness.
Before you generalize, check your facts.

Answer 7

you are having a laugh! what about all the problems that fat people have? and what about those who drink regularly or take drugs??

besides the smokers i know dont have a problem with no smoking at work and they dont show any side effects. and in my experience all these people which are on unhealthy diets,are more ill than anybody else.

im a smoker and im hardly ever sick. so your theory is utterly nonsense.

thanks shaz!!!

Answer 8

If this is done then you are going to have to do the same for others. Twinkie eaters, those that consume nasty fast food. corn syrup filled items etc. These cause obesity and diabetes.

Answer 9

give me a break, actually the people who live a completely sterilized life are more prone to sickness.

if the government was as worried about the cost of smoking, and worried about people instead of unfairly taxing individuals.

they would first end tobacco subsidies to farmers

they need to lead by example

Answer 10

You are getting too carried away, now. Force the tobacco companies to pay for our cessation. They hooked us!