
Originally Posted by
Hitcher
This hoary old fallacious argument assumes that there is no cost associated with tobacco, other than what smokers spend on their habits with the proceeds of those being shared by retailers, tobacco companies and the Government.
One in five smokers will die from smoking-related causes. That would be just fine if those were clean and tidy deaths at no cost to the taxpayers who fund the medical expenses associated with what are often long and costly illnesses. Then there are the people who aren't smokers but whose health is munted by passive smoking.
Without any of these consequences, then tobacco products probably would most certainly be a cash cow for graspingly desperate politicians.
Passive smoking is nothing more than a statistical concept, a piece of PR bull invented to give non-smokers a moral platform from which to preach to smokers. (sheesh, how many millions "mainline" 20 or more smokes a day around the world without suffering the nonsense symptoms claimed by "passive smokers")
Anyhow, while those reformed smokers are living longer and paying less taxes, they will instead get other long term ailments associated with geriatric care, oh and they will need to collect super' for longer too.
"There must be a one-to-one correspondence between left and right parentheses, with each left parenthesis to the left of its corresponding right parenthesis."
Bookmarks