Practice, practice, practice
 

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 19:41:45 -0500, JohnH wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 00:21:25 GMT, Tom Francis
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 17:55:15 -0500, JohnH wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 21:59:40 GMT, "Calif Bill"

wrote:


"JohnH" wrote in message
news:uviiq2hi5dg9iingdmplm79n954ptmiav8@4ax. com...
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 15:23:08 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Calif Bill wrote:
"Dan" wrote in message
...
Harry Krause wrote:

On 1/12/2007 9:22 AM, JimH wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...=knockdown.flv

All I can say is.......dam!


Here's the handgun, sans the special sight.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...us/x-five1.jpg
Are you an NRA member?

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


No, he is anti hand gun formerly.



It is amazing how people's attitude change when they decide they
want to
own or use what they formally wanted to ban.

For me, the converse is also true, especially with cigarettes.

Cigarettes are nasty. But they are a legal drug and people ought to
have
some freedom of choice. Limit where they can smoke in public places,
but as
long as the rest of us do not have to pay for their habit, let them
smoke.
Disclaimer: I do own a decent part of Altria, but do not smoke.


We do pay for much of the results of their habits. I had pneumonia
(sp?)
twice, and even spent some time in the hospital with it. I couldn't
tell
you the number of times I went to the doc with bronchitis, not to
mention
the problems with teeth and gums caused by cigarettes. As I was in the
military, *we* paid for it with our taxes.

I don't propose making cigarettes illegal, but I'd be in favor of
making
them much harder to acquire, especially for minors. It's very sad
driving
by the high schools and seeing the groups of kids puffing away just off
school property.

Tell me - just out of curiosity - which costs Americans more in terms
of dollars - cigarettes or drunk drivers.

Think about it first before you answer.

My guess would be cigarettes. Most drunk drivers don't cost Americans
anything, unless they're involved in an accident or put behind bars. I'm
guessing that only a small percent of those who have driven drunk have
had
an accident or been caught. I know I never was!

You would be wrong. It's almost two to one in terms of dollars.

I would guess that it is a lot greater number than that. Overall, smoking
does not cost the non smoking taxpayer anything.

Huh?

Practice, practice, practice
 

"JimH" wrote in message
...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
hlink.net...

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 19:41:45 -0500, JohnH wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 00:21:25 GMT, Tom Francis
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 17:55:15 -0500, JohnH wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 21:59:40 GMT, "Calif Bill"

wrote:


"JohnH" wrote in message
news:uviiq2hi5dg9iingdmplm79n954ptmiav8@4ax .com...
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 15:23:08 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Calif Bill wrote:
"Dan" wrote in message
...
Harry Krause wrote:

On 1/12/2007 9:22 AM, JimH wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...=knockdown.flv

All I can say is.......dam!


Here's the handgun, sans the special sight.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...us/x-five1.jpg
Are you an NRA member?

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


No, he is anti hand gun formerly.



It is amazing how people's attitude change when they decide they
want to
own or use what they formally wanted to ban.

For me, the converse is also true, especially with cigarettes.

Cigarettes are nasty. But they are a legal drug and people ought to
have
some freedom of choice. Limit where they can smoke in public places,
but as
long as the rest of us do not have to pay for their habit, let them
smoke.
Disclaimer: I do own a decent part of Altria, but do not smoke.


We do pay for much of the results of their habits. I had pneumonia
(sp?)
twice, and even spent some time in the hospital with it. I couldn't
tell
you the number of times I went to the doc with bronchitis, not to
mention
the problems with teeth and gums caused by cigarettes. As I was in the
military, *we* paid for it with our taxes.

I don't propose making cigarettes illegal, but I'd be in favor of
making
them much harder to acquire, especially for minors. It's very sad
driving
by the high schools and seeing the groups of kids puffing away just
off
school property.

Tell me - just out of curiosity - which costs Americans more in terms
of dollars - cigarettes or drunk drivers.

Think about it first before you answer.

My guess would be cigarettes. Most drunk drivers don't cost Americans
anything, unless they're involved in an accident or put behind bars. I'm
guessing that only a small percent of those who have driven drunk have
had
an accident or been caught. I know I never was!

You would be wrong. It's almost two to one in terms of dollars.

I would guess that it is a lot greater number than that. Overall,
smoking does not cost the non smoking taxpayer anything.

Huh?


Studies show that cigarettes bring in a lot more money in taxes than are
paid out in health care costs. And smokers die a few years earlier than non
smokers, so there is less Social Security and Medicare paid out. Very
simple equation.

Practice, practice, practice
 

"Calif Bill" wrote in message news:rchqh.14082

I would guess that it is a lot greater number than that. Overall,
smoking does not cost the non smoking taxpayer anything.

Huh?


Studies show that cigarettes bring in a lot more money in taxes than are
paid out in health care costs. And smokers die a few years earlier than
non smokers, so there is less Social Security and Medicare paid out. Very
simple equation.


Please tell the insurance companies to reduce my health care insurance
premiums as smokers do not have any impact on their costs.

I am a taxpayer and the health care costs of smokers impact my health care
premiums.

Practice, practice, practice
 

"JimH" wrote in message
...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message news:rchqh.14082

I would guess that it is a lot greater number than that. Overall,
smoking does not cost the non smoking taxpayer anything.

Huh?


Studies show that cigarettes bring in a lot more money in taxes than are
paid out in health care costs. And smokers die a few years earlier than
non smokers, so there is less Social Security and Medicare paid out.
Very simple equation.


Please tell the insurance companies to reduce my health care insurance
premium as smokers do not have any impact on their costs.

I am a taxpayer and the health care costs of smokers impact my health care
premium.


BTW: I am not a smoker.

Practice, practice, practice
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
On 1/14/2007 7:10 AM, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 22:47:01 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

On 1/13/2007 10:31 PM, JimH wrote:
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
news:rchqh.14082

I would guess that it is a lot greater number than that. Overall,
smoking does not cost the non smoking taxpayer anything.
Huh?

Studies show that cigarettes bring in a lot more money in taxes than
are paid out in health care costs. And smokers die a few years
earlier than non smokers, so there is less Social Security and
Medicare paid out. Very simple equation.

Please tell the insurance companies to reduce my health care insurance
premiums as smokers do not have any impact on their costs.

I am a taxpayer and the health care costs of smokers impact my health
care premiums.
Damned straight it does. For several years, I had direct access to a
huge database of insurance information, including comparative statistics
on smokers and non-smokers. Smokers without exception had substantially
more hits against the insurance for all sorts of reasons.

What we are getting here is obfuscation and rationalization from smokers
.
Smoking in the home where children are present ought to be a serious
misdemeanor and if repeated, a felony.

Fortunately, almost all the good restaurants in these here parts have
banned smoking, and smoking is also banned in almost all office
buildings downtown. I hope it is next banned from the sidewalks in front
of buildings. Who the hell wants to smell the stench created by a
cigarette smoker? Blech.

In terms of dollars spent per incident, drunk driving causes more harm
to the American citizen than smoking.

In terms of health dollars, drinking alcohol causes more health
problems in terms of dollars spent than smoking.

In terms of lost productivity, drinking alcohol causes more loss of
dollars spent than smoking.

In terms of overall impact to society, drinking alcohol causes more
damage to individuals than smoking.

Now why aren't we taxing and banning sales of alcohol?

These read like cites from Cigar World Magazine.

In terms of which habit is more objectionable and invasive to non
participants, I invite tobacco and alcohol users to perform this
experiment. Lock yourself in your car with an hour's supply of your favorite
alcoholic beverage and an hours supply of your favorite tobacco product.
Roll up the windows and close the vents. Enjoy them and report your
findings.

Practice, practice, practice
 

Harry Krause wrote:
On 1/14/2007 8:12 AM, Jim wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
On 1/14/2007 7:10 AM, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 22:47:01 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

On 1/13/2007 10:31 PM, JimH wrote:
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
news:rchqh.14082

I would guess that it is a lot greater number than that.
Overall, smoking does not cost the non smoking taxpayer anything.
Huh?

Studies show that cigarettes bring in a lot more money in taxes
than are paid out in health care costs. And smokers die a few
years earlier than non smokers, so there is less Social Security
and Medicare paid out. Very simple equation.

Please tell the insurance companies to reduce my health care
insurance premiums as smokers do not have any impact on their costs.

I am a taxpayer and the health care costs of smokers impact my
health care premiums.
Damned straight it does. For several years, I had direct access to
a huge database of insurance information, including comparative
statistics on smokers and non-smokers. Smokers without exception
had substantially more hits against the insurance for all sorts of
reasons.

What we are getting here is obfuscation and rationalization from
smokers .
Smoking in the home where children are present ought to be a
serious misdemeanor and if repeated, a felony.

Fortunately, almost all the good restaurants in these here parts
have banned smoking, and smoking is also banned in almost all
office buildings downtown. I hope it is next banned from the
sidewalks in front of buildings. Who the hell wants to smell the
stench created by a cigarette smoker? Blech.
In terms of dollars spent per incident, drunk driving causes more harm
to the American citizen than smoking.

In terms of health dollars, drinking alcohol causes more health
problems in terms of dollars spent than smoking.

In terms of lost productivity, drinking alcohol causes more loss of
dollars spent than smoking.

In terms of overall impact to society, drinking alcohol causes more
damage to individuals than smoking.

Now why aren't we taxing and banning sales of alcohol?
These read like cites from Cigar World Magazine.

In terms of which habit is more objectionable and invasive to non
participants, I invite tobacco and alcohol users to perform this
experiment. Lock yourself in your car with an hour's supply of your
favorite alcoholic beverage and an hours supply of your favorite
tobacco product. Roll up the windows and close the vents. Enjoy them
and report your findings.



Preferably in a garage while the engine is running and all garage doors
are closed.

Would you please show us how to do it.

Practice, practice, practice
 

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 02:02:39 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 19:41:45 -0500, JohnH wrote:

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 00:21:25 GMT, Tom Francis
wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 17:55:15 -0500, JohnH wrote:

On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 21:59:40 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"JohnH" wrote in message
om...
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 15:23:08 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Calif Bill wrote:
"Dan" wrote in message
...
Harry Krause wrote:

On 1/12/2007 9:22 AM, JimH wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

http://s21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...=knockdown.flv

All I can say is.......dam!


Here's the handgun, sans the special sight.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...us/x-five1.jpg
Are you an NRA member?

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


No, he is anti hand gun formerly.



It is amazing how people's attitude change when they decide they want to
own or use what they formally wanted to ban.

For me, the converse is also true, especially with cigarettes.

Cigarettes are nasty. But they are a legal drug and people ought to have
some freedom of choice. Limit where they can smoke in public places, but as
long as the rest of us do not have to pay for their habit, let them smoke.
Disclaimer: I do own a decent part of Altria, but do not smoke.


We do pay for much of the results of their habits. I had pneumonia (sp?)
twice, and even spent some time in the hospital with it. I couldn't tell
you the number of times I went to the doc with bronchitis, not to mention
the problems with teeth and gums caused by cigarettes. As I was in the
military, *we* paid for it with our taxes.

I don't propose making cigarettes illegal, but I'd be in favor of making
them much harder to acquire, especially for minors. It's very sad driving
by the high schools and seeing the groups of kids puffing away just off
school property.

Tell me - just out of curiosity - which costs Americans more in terms
of dollars - cigarettes or drunk drivers.

Think about it first before you answer.

My guess would be cigarettes. Most drunk drivers don't cost Americans
anything, unless they're involved in an accident or put behind bars. I'm
guessing that only a small percent of those who have driven drunk have had
an accident or been caught. I know I never was!

You would be wrong. It's almost two to one in terms of dollars.

I'd love to see some data supporting that, especially how they derived the
costs.
--
******************************************
***** Have a super day! *****
******************************************

John H

Practice, practice, practice
 

On Sun, 14 Jan 2007 13:12:19 GMT, "Jim" wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
On 1/14/2007 7:10 AM, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 22:47:01 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

On 1/13/2007 10:31 PM, JimH wrote:
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
news:rchqh.14082

I would guess that it is a lot greater number than that. Overall,
smoking does not cost the non smoking taxpayer anything.
Huh?

Studies show that cigarettes bring in a lot more money in taxes than
are paid out in health care costs. And smokers die a few years
earlier than non smokers, so there is less Social Security and
Medicare paid out. Very simple equation.

Please tell the insurance companies to reduce my health care insurance
premiums as smokers do not have any impact on their costs.

I am a taxpayer and the health care costs of smokers impact my health
care premiums.
Damned straight it does. For several years, I had direct access to a
huge database of insurance information, including comparative statistics
on smokers and non-smokers. Smokers without exception had substantially
more hits against the insurance for all sorts of reasons.

What we are getting here is obfuscation and rationalization from smokers
.
Smoking in the home where children are present ought to be a serious
misdemeanor and if repeated, a felony.

Fortunately, almost all the good restaurants in these here parts have
banned smoking, and smoking is also banned in almost all office
buildings downtown. I hope it is next banned from the sidewalks in front
of buildings. Who the hell wants to smell the stench created by a
cigarette smoker? Blech.

In terms of dollars spent per incident, drunk driving causes more harm
to the American citizen than smoking.

In terms of health dollars, drinking alcohol causes more health
problems in terms of dollars spent than smoking.

In terms of lost productivity, drinking alcohol causes more loss of
dollars spent than smoking.

In terms of overall impact to society, drinking alcohol causes more
damage to individuals than smoking.

Now why aren't we taxing and banning sales of alcohol?

These read like cites from Cigar World Magazine.

In terms of which habit is more objectionable and invasive to non
participants, I invite tobacco and alcohol users to perform this
experiment. Lock yourself in your car with an hour's supply of your favorite
alcoholic beverage and an hours supply of your favorite tobacco product.
Roll up the windows and close the vents. Enjoy them and report your
findings.


And for you beer drinkers...no leaving the car to pee!
--
******************************************
***** Have a super day! *****
******************************************

John H

Practice, practice, practice
 

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 22:47:01 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

On 1/13/2007 10:31 PM, JimH wrote:
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
news:rchqh.14082

I would guess that it is a lot greater number than that. Overall,
smoking does not cost the non smoking taxpayer anything.
Huh?

Studies show that cigarettes bring in a lot more money in taxes than
are
paid out in health care costs. And smokers die a few years earlier
than
non smokers, so there is less Social Security and Medicare paid out.
Very
simple equation.


Please tell the insurance companies to reduce my health care insurance
premiums as smokers do not have any impact on their costs.

I am a taxpayer and the health care costs of smokers impact my health
care
premiums.

Damned straight it does. For several years, I had direct access to a
huge database of insurance information, including comparative statistics
on smokers and non-smokers. Smokers without exception had substantially
more hits against the insurance for all sorts of reasons.

What we are getting here is obfuscation and rationalization from smokers .
Smoking in the home where children are present ought to be a serious
misdemeanor and if repeated, a felony.

Fortunately, almost all the good restaurants in these here parts have
banned smoking, and smoking is also banned in almost all office
buildings downtown. I hope it is next banned from the sidewalks in front
of buildings. Who the hell wants to smell the stench created by a
cigarette smoker? Blech.


In terms of health dollars, drinking alcohol causes more health
problems in terms of dollars spent than smoking.


According to these articles smokers cost us $73 billion in health care.

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkele...6/smoking.html

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/co...o_Business.asp

According to this article excessive drinkers cost us $35 billion in health
care.

http://www.forbes.com/2006/08/22/hea...0822costs.html

Also (from the ACS link):

Statistics related to the cost to business of employee tobacco use include
the following data from published reports:

Cigarette smokers are absent from work 6.5 days per year more than
nonsmokers.

Approximately eight percent of a smokers working hours are spent on smoking
rituals.

Smokers make about six more visits to health care facilities per year than
nonsmokers. In a study of health care utilization in 20,831 employees of a
single, large employer, smokers had more hospital admissions per 1,000 (124
vs. 76 admissions), a longer average length of stay (6.47 vs. 5.03 days),
higher average costs for outpatient visits ($122 vs. $75), and a higher
average insured payment for health care ($1,145 vs. $762).

Average lifetime medical care costs for male smokers are 32 percent higher
than for men who have never smoked. For female smokers, that cost is 24
percent.

Practice, practice, practice
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
On 1/14/2007 9:18 AM, JimH wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 13 Jan 2007 22:47:01 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

On 1/13/2007 10:31 PM, JimH wrote:
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
news:rchqh.14082

I would guess that it is a lot greater number than that. Overall,
smoking does not cost the non smoking taxpayer anything.
Huh?

Studies show that cigarettes bring in a lot more money in taxes than
are
paid out in health care costs. And smokers die a few years earlier
than
non smokers, so there is less Social Security and Medicare paid out.
Very
simple equation.

Please tell the insurance companies to reduce my health care insurance
premiums as smokers do not have any impact on their costs.

I am a taxpayer and the health care costs of smokers impact my health
care
premiums.
Damned straight it does. For several years, I had direct access to a
huge database of insurance information, including comparative
statistics
on smokers and non-smokers. Smokers without exception had substantially
more hits against the insurance for all sorts of reasons.

What we are getting here is obfuscation and rationalization from
smokers .
Smoking in the home where children are present ought to be a serious
misdemeanor and if repeated, a felony.

Fortunately, almost all the good restaurants in these here parts have
banned smoking, and smoking is also banned in almost all office
buildings downtown. I hope it is next banned from the sidewalks in
front
of buildings. Who the hell wants to smell the stench created by a
cigarette smoker? Blech.

In terms of health dollars, drinking alcohol causes more health
problems in terms of dollars spent than smoking.


According to these articles smokers cost us $73 billion in health care.

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkele...6/smoking.html

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/co...o_Business.asp

According to this article excessive drinkers cost us $35 billion in
health care.

http://www.forbes.com/2006/08/22/hea...0822costs.html

Also (from the ACS link):

Statistics related to the cost to business of employee tobacco use
include the following data from published reports:

Cigarette smokers are absent from work 6.5 days per year more than
nonsmokers.

Approximately eight percent of a smokers working hours are spent on
smoking rituals.

Smokers make about six more visits to health care facilities per year
than nonsmokers. In a study of health care utilization in 20,831
employees of a single, large employer, smokers had more hospital
admissions per 1,000 (124 vs. 76 admissions), a longer average length of
stay (6.47 vs. 5.03 days), higher average costs for outpatient visits
($122 vs. $75), and a higher average insured payment for health care
($1,145 vs. $762).

Average lifetime medical care costs for male smokers are 32 percent
higher than for men who have never smoked. For female smokers, that cost
is 24 percent.





Your stats match the trends I saw when I had access to insurance company
statistics.

Most smokers smoke all day long. Most drinkers are occasional drinkers,
and might go weeks or months between a drink or two. I had a beer in
November at Mexican restaurant, and haven't had another since. I had a
margarita New Year's Eve, and haven't had another hard drink since.

Smokers are as self-deluding as alcoholics.

There is no doubt that drunk drivers kill thousands annually. And I am sure
Tom's viewpoint is somewhat biased based on his service with the EMT's and
seeing folks killed on the road from drunk drivers.

But there is also no doubt that smoking (including the effects of second
hand smoke) is more of a killer and a drain on our health care dollars.