27-01-2005 17:28									#121
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

They do raise it every budget.

	27-01-2005 17:35									#122
	Got spare money?

che wrote:

quote: Nobody just smokes the occassional cigarette, so you can't compare it to drug use (which is illegal) or the occasional drink.

You don't get the phenomenon of "party smokers" in Florida? That's to say, people who don't smoke regularly, but'll take a cigarette or cigar on the occasional party.

	27-01-2005 17:40									#123
	Got spare money?

They do, I know some. Laz Gimp is one.

	27-01-2005 18:00									#124
	Inflate your Upload Space

There is good news on the horizon regarding all of these problems. A new drug is in trials that dramatically curbs appetite, but also seems to reduce the craving for cigarettes. The drug it turns out is a Cannabinoid Receptor Blocker , it literally turns off the munchies. Of course as you might deduce it blocks the effects of marijuana on the brain.

Given the epiudemic of obesity, smoking and drug use among our nations youth I predict that once it hits the market entire high schools will be put on this stuff.

	27-01-2005 18:05									#125
	Tired of ads?

If the smokers should pay the true price of smoking, a pack of cigarettes should cost about 40 $ according to a study made by the Duke University of Durham, NC

http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/news/c...oking_1104.html

	27-01-2005 18:22									#126
	Put an end to popups!

Companies aren't gonna fire all people who make unhealthy lifestyle choices, because that would reduce their pool of potential labour. But I don't see why they shouldn't be able to exclude such categories as for which they figure that the savings from dumping them exceeds the loss of talent.

	27-01-2005 18:26									#127
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Kamrat X If the smokers should pay the true price of smoking, a pack of cigarettes should cost about 40 $ according to a study made by the Duke University of Durham, NC

And from that study...

quote: The authors found that smokers’ costs to society are less than generally believed -- about $1.44 of the $40-per-pack total -- when costs to the smoker’s family are not included. "The reason the number is low is that for private pensions, Social Security, and Medicare -- the biggest factors in calculating costs to society -- smoking actually saves money," Sloan said. "Smokers die at a younger age and don’t draw on the funds they’ve paid into those systems." Using this figure, some economists might suggest that cigarette excise taxes in many states already are high enough to recover society’s portion of the cost of smoking.

Hmmmmm...

	27-01-2005 19:01									#128
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

But he continues...

quote: But when the combined costs to society and to other family members are considered ($6.88 per pack), one might conclude instead that excise taxes are far too low, Sloan said. Given the high costs and adverse effects of smoking on individuals, it is "remarkable," the authors conclude, that funds from the 1998 settlement involving 46 state attorneys’ general and major tobacco manufacturers largely are not being spent on smoking-cessation or related programs. Many states are using the funds to cover budget deficits or, as in North Carolina, on economic development in tobacco communities

	27-01-2005 19:16									#129
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

True enough... but the point that some have tried to make that smokers cause a financial drain on the medical system is not an accurate one. This study shows that the taxes being paid by smokers probably covers the costs to society...

Fat people, gays and other high risk groups, are a REAL drain on the health care system since they don't get taxed to make up the difference that they cost.

While nobody would argue that smoking is a good thing to do, "SOMEBODY" called smokers morons because of the COST to himself, which as the study points out, is probably not true... Other high risk groups cause a much higher drain on the healthcare system... so this person should be calling Gays, Fat people, women who will have children... morons for costing him money, not smokers

Now, as you pointed out, some states have decided to use the revenues generated through taxes and litigation for other things... I don't see that as very relevent to the discussions of cost to society, since the money is there. If they want to "rob peter to pay paul" thats their decision.

	27-01-2005 19:17									#130
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Ted Striker You know obesity is like just as costly on our healthcare system as smoking is. And in fact I would say probably more since it is widespread. So what are we gonna do next, fire all the obese people?

quote: Unforunatley that's not gonna work, we would have to start importing about 200 million foreign workers.

Canadians.

	27-01-2005 19:19									#131
	Remove this text

Asher... using your logic... all gay people should get fired next, because as a group, they are a bigger drain on the healthcare system than smokers

	27-01-2005 19:27									#132
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Ming Fat people, gays and other high risk groups, are a REAL drain on the health care system since they don't get taxed to make up the difference that they cost.

Let's stop with the categorical "gays" discrimination -- while statistically "gays" may cost more, just like women statistically cost more than men, it's a silly way to discriminate for price.

For the gays that live the high-risk lifestyle -- which is an above average rate than normal -- they will have increased costs. The idea isn't to fire gays for high risk, it's to fire the people who live high-risk lifestyles, period.

Not all gays have a high-risk lifestyle, while all smokers will be a much higher risk medically.

There is a difference.

	27-01-2005 19:31									#133
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

For example, I'm a young guy who doesn't smoke, goes to the gym 3 times a week, in a monogamous long-term relationship.

I'm the kind of guy insurance companies love.

	27-01-2005 19:37									#134
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Asher Not all gays have a high-risk lifestyle, while all smokers will be a much higher risk medically. There is a difference.

Sorry... there is NO difference. You want to nail one group as a whole while ignoring individuality, yet you claim individuality for gays. You can't have it both ways.

Statistically, gays and smokers as a group fall into a higher risk category. That is a fact. As you point out, that risk can be mitigated by gays if they play it smart.
But the same holds true for smokers. There is a big difference between social smokers and smokers that smoke two packs a day. Living in a major city can cause as much harm as an occasional smoke due to polution.

And again... your point was that smokers cost you money... and as the study points out, they pay their own way, and in reality, probably don't cost you anything. Yet gays who don't practice safe sex DO cost you money... So it's gays you should be calling morons... not smokers... based on your "costing me money" argument.

Again, smoking isn't a smart thing to do... but it ain't costing you a cent. Unsafe sex by gays is costing you money So they are the ones that should be fired

	27-01-2005 19:44									#135
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Ming Sorry... there is NO difference. You want to nail one group as a whole while ignoring individuality, yet you claim individuality for gays. You can't have it both ways.

Eh?

There is no individuality when you discriminate against smokers for smoking.

You are discriminating against smokers for undeniably smoking, which is a well-known major health risk.

When you discriminate gays for the same reason, you do it based on stereotype and generalization.

All smokers are smokers, not all gays practice unsafe sex and live a high-risk lifestyle.

You have to be kidding me when you say there's no difference, unless you really believe all gays are high-risk just like all smokers are high-risk.

	27-01-2005 19:54									#136
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Yet again... you want to say that all gays aren't alike... but you want to claim all smokers are alike...

Just as there is a difference between gays, there is a difference between smokers.

Somebody who smokes a few cigs a day is totally different than a two pack a day person. And some smokers only smoke when they go out and party... again, totally different that a two pack a day smoker.

You are the one trying to make broad sweeping generalizations...

	27-01-2005 19:57									#137
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

An observation:

A person works 8hrs a day min. and isnt allowed to smoke a cigarette for these 8hrs.

If a smoker is able to not smoke for 8hrs, I dont consider him a smoker.

	27-01-2005 19:59									#138
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Difference is, smokers are evil. Kill 'em.

	27-01-2005 20:00									#139
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Ming, the financial drain on the economic system may be lower in the US since the welfare system isn´t financed by taxes to a large extent. But it affects the society as a whole, and in Sweden the cost for smoking is thought to be around 4 billion $. This includes loss in productivity due to sick leave, healtcare costs, early retirement and such. Allthough swedish tobacco tax is rather high (about 50 % of the retail price) it only generates approx. 700 000 $ / year to the treasury department. I don´t think you can break out individual cost to the healtcare system in Sweden since it´s different than in the US. But if you add in all the costs above I´m sure that 40 $ / pack is quite accurate for the US.

Edit: I´m sorry if I sound incoherent. I´ve been staring at the screen all day. I think I need some fresh air...

	27-01-2005 20:03									#140
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Ming Yet again... you want to say that all gays aren't alike... but you want to claim all smokers are alike...

A smoker is a smoker.

Smoking causes cancer, it's very well known...

Smoking is dangerous and risky in and of itself. Being gay is not.

They are different. Simple as that...

	27-01-2005 20:12									#141
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Ming Yet again... you want to say that all gays aren't alike... but you want to claim all smokers are alike... You are the one trying to make broad sweeping generalizations...

Erm- some gay men (and lesbians) are (and always have been) celibate. No high risk sexual activity of any kind.

I grew up in a family of heavy smokers, and from what I recall, a smoker is a person who smokes. Cigarettes, cigars, joints, whatever. Those nasty coffin nails, full of those lovely toxins and carcinogenic chemicals.

There is a difference, you see....

	27-01-2005 20:26									#142
	Increase Your PM Length

Look, tobacco does need to be outlawed along with alcohol and maybe caffeine. However, firing people for what they do in their private time is still unconscionable and unethical.

Drug tests are an invasion of privacy.

	27-01-2005 21:16									#143
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Ming Somebody who smokes a few cigs a day is totally different than a two pack a day person. And some smokers only smoke when they go out and party... again, totally different that a two pack a day smoker.

Not really that much of a difference in elevated health risks.

	27-01-2005 21:25									#144
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

They could fire everyone who lives with a smoker, or everyone who goes to bars where smoking is allowed etc. as well. on the same health grounds. What do people think of that.

Anyway this is an absolutely disgusting decision no matter what people think about smoking/smokers. If the situation in the US makes companies need to do this, and also allows it then that's one f*cked up country.

	27-01-2005 22:04									#145
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Asher A smoker is a smoker.

A gay person is a gay person, your point?

quote: Smoking causes cancer, it's very well known...

Many things "can" cause cancer... that is very well known as well. However, there is NO proof that it WILL CAUSE cancer. It also has a lot to do with the AMOUNT a person smokes. Somebody who smokes one or two a day is at as much risk as somebody who lives in a major city due to polution.

quote: Smoking is dangerous and risky in and of itself.

It "CAN" be, but not always, and again, it depends on the level you smoke, and how long you've been smoking.

quote: Being gay is not.

But it also CAN be... and as a group, gays fall into a higher risk group.

If you want to consider ALL smokers are the same, then you have to do the same for gays.

All I'm asking is that you look at smokers as individuals, and not group them all together... which is what you are asking for gays.

SIMPLE FACTS

GAYS have a higher health risk factor
Smokers have a higher health risk factor

It varies dramitically by individual, but as groups, the statistics prove the above facts.

	27-01-2005 22:05									#146
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Not all smokers develop cancer.
Not all gays get aids.

I see no difference.

	27-01-2005 22:10									#147
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by MikeH They could fire everyone who lives with a smoker, or everyone who goes to bars where smoking is allowed etc. as well. on the same health grounds. What do people think of that.

Good idea.

	27-01-2005 22:11									#148
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

There are certain racial differences in healthcare needs. Certain genetic types are slightly more likely to get certain illnesses.

I presume this means that the company could fire all employees of a certain race on healthcare costs grounds too.

	27-01-2005 22:14									#149
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Kamrat X If the smokers should pay the true price of smoking, a pack of cigarettes should cost about 40 $ according to a study made by the Duke University of Durham, NC

No problem, let's make hamburgers cost 40$ too then, shall we.

	27-01-2005 22:16									#150
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ming Many things "can" cause cancer... that is very well known as well. However, there is NO proof that it WILL CAUSE cancer.

The odds are likely, depending if you get some other form of cancer first or die from some other cause.

quote: But it also CAN be... and as a group, gays fall into a higher risk group. If you want to consider ALL smokers are the same, then you have to do the same for gays.

No -- I'm not grouping them based on category, I'm grouping them based on their actions and activity.

It would be fair to compare smokers to people who have unprotected sex, but not fair to compare them to gays. There is a difference.

quote: All I'm asking is that you look at smokers as individuals

They're individuals making a conscious decision to smoke, which is known to drastically increase risks of very expensive and hard to treat illnesses.

I don't need to look at them as individuals when they've all made the same dumb choice.

It is fundamentally different to complare sexual orientation (an identity, a trait) to a conscious choice anyone can make with known harmful effects.