A tremendous observation on your part most brilliant Captain. Only a true
Master Mariner is capable of such cognitive function.
The only possible solution to insure freedom is to eliminate health
insurance in its current form. The government should get out of health care,
the notion that health care is a right should be discouraged and the pooling
of risk associated with risky behavior should be eliminated. Those who
create their own health problems should bear the cost themselves.
I wouldn't encourage anyone I value to smoke. However I also realize that it
is a personal choice left up to the individual. Just as I wouldn't encourage
Mooron to have unprotected sex with Haitian male prostitutes, I realize that
it is his choice and his choice alone. I can only attempt to persuade him
not to do so and that has its limits.
Gilligan
"Capt. NealŪ" wrote in message
...
As usual, Little Buddy, your observations are brilliant. I should
encourage all those who smoke to continue to smoke and to
smoke even more. This works on a broad level to rid society
of the retirement cost of those who slowly suicide themselves.
But, even with the benefit to the retirement system because
of the premature death of smokers, there is an equal cost
incurred while these people are alive due to lost productivity
in the workplace and increased health care cost in the insurance
sector which cost is spread across the spectrum to healthy
people who are intelligent enough to not smoke to begin with
or to quit as soon as possible.
In the long run, even with the premature death of smokers,
there is no overall benefit from smokers and their stupid,
destructive habit. On the contrary, even while they die
sooner and help the solvency of the retirement system, this
savings is not comparable to the overall cost to society.
Then, there is the issue of personal relationships. Say your
wife or you child smokes cigarettes. Are you going to encourage
them to smoke even more so they become unhealthy while alive
and die years sooner than they would had they never started
smoking.
Normally, I hate all smokers and don't mind seeing them get
their due for their stupid habit that smacks of low self-esteem,
but once in a while a smoker comes along whom I care for very
much and whom I would rather see quit the habit than kill themselves
slowly. What say you to this more personal aspect of smoking?
CN
"Gilligan" wrote in message
ink.net...
I must disagree with your otherwise brilliant opinion good Captain. If
you
give my argument the consideration it is due, you will find great
benefit to
those, such as ourselves, who maintain a state of hardiness suitable to
a
life of manly adventure.
I encourage smoking. I want people to smoke ten packs of cigarettes a
day.
There is no cost, but only benefit to society for such behavior. The
benefit
is that the majority of these smokers will die just before they can
collect
Social Security or Medicare. They will have paid all their lives into
the
system, but perish before collecting a dime. I and others such as the
robust
good Captain Neal will collect said benefits for 4 or 5 decades. I thank
these smokers for keeping the costs of these social programs so low.
Besides
smoking they should consume large amounts of butter, mayonaise and
Crisco.
Their poor health will keep them out of the woods, off of the waterways,
bikepaths, mountains and the like.
I thank all those who have chosen to perish early, for they have kept
the
cost of unconstitutional social programs low.
Gilligan
"Capt. NealŪ" wrote in message
...
YES! It's about time they started getting tough with stupid
smokers who run up everybody's health bills and who pollute
everybody's air.
Company Fires All Employees Who Smoke
Michigan Firm Won't Allow Smoking, Even On Employee's Own Time
UPDATED: 8:20 AM EST January 25, 2005
LANSING, Mich. -- Four employees of a health care company have
been fired for refusing to take a test to determine whether they
smoke cigarettes.
Weyco Inc., a health benefits administrator based in Okemos,
Mich., adopted a policy Jan. 1 that allows employees to be fired
if they smoke, even if the smoking happens after business hours
or at home.
Company founder Howard Weyers has said the anti-smoking rule
was designed to shield the firm from high health care costs. "I
don't want to pay for the results of smoking," he said. The rule
led one employee to quit before the policy was adopted. Four
others were fired when they balked at the smoking test.
Chief Financial Officer Gary Climes estimated that 18 to 20 of
the company's 200 employers were smokers when the policy was
announced in 2003. Of those, as many as 14 quit smoking before
the policy went into effect. The company offered them help to
kick the habit.
"That is absolutely a victory," Climes said. On the company's Web
site, it states: Weyco Inc. is a non-smoking company that strongly
supports its employees in living healthy lifestyles.
The above is from: http://www.wral.com/news/4126577/detail.html
CN