Today, to understand the most basic and obvious reality, people seem to need a “study," and a lot of money wasted. What an abysmal situation.
"Public Health" has always said slim non-smokers are more likely to grow elderly. The elderly typically do not work. They typically suffer infirmities. Now the news world is buzzing with the latest and greatest “discovery." It is not true that smokers and fat people cost more to society. The opposite is true on the grounds that they die earlier so save the health care systems a bundle. Magna cum laude to the geniuses who figured that out! We at FORCES said all along that, if Public Health statements are taken at face value, a cost savings on smokers and fat persons would be the necessary logical result. Now, however, the obvious is stated by "authorities," so it can be believed!
People live longer or shorter lives for a myriad of reasons. We do not take Public Health statistical interpretations or "attributions" at face value by any means. Nevertheless, this study demonstrates another obvious point: the health authorities have lied to us – again! – when they said that us smokers and fatsos are a net cost to health care. Another thing we said all along is that “public health authorities” are compulsive, pathological liars, and here is proof again.
With the unquantifiable stuffed into computer models, this “study” says that those with “healthy” lifestyles cost to society some $417,000, from age 20 on, versus the $371,000 of fat people, and the $326,000 of the smokers. It follows that the smoker costs $91,000 less than the non-smoker. In a desperate effort to reduce the impact of this umpteenth debunking of the antismoking fraud the writer of this AP piece, Maria Cheng, points out that: "The study, paid for by the Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports, did not take into account other potential costs of obesity and smoking, such as lost economic productivity or social costs." Aha! Still some hope for the cause of hate! On the other hand the aspiring antismoker Cheng does not take into account that the issue of the potential years of life lost is yet another antismoking fraud on the public. See our data bank on this matter.
Nor is she willing to consider, of course, the taxes on tobacco that the smoker contributes to society. Making the wild but optimistic assumption that a pack of cigarettes yields only $3.00 to society in tax alone (very optimistic today, we may add, and it does not keep into account the people the tobacco industry employs, the corporate taxes, etc.), that means that a pack-a-day smoker for 40 years contributes to society (3.00 x 365 x 40) = $43,800 on top of the $91,000 he saves in the first place. The total gain of society next to the non-smoker is therefore (43,800 + 91,000) = $134,800.
Assume for the moment that the $91,000 saving per smoker versus a non-smoker is true and accurate. Do the math figuring the numbers of smokers and non-smokers in your country and you come up with an immense cost of non-smokers to society next to smokers. Be ready for figures your pocket calculator cannot even manage. Then assume an identical attitude toward non-smokers to that which antitobacco has foisted upon smokers for years. Then you will ask: Why should smokers pay for the extra cost of non-smokers?
Go ahead and bitch! Those selfish non-smokers cost in pensions and in medicare. They pay no tobacco taxes. By living longer in their non-productive retired life, they take up space, consume resources and energy, create pollution, eat our supplies – all that not calculated in the study, by the way. By applying the very same logic of the health bastards, therefore, we must demand that non-smokers pay an existence tax for the immense extras they consume. The fat people should also make the same demands next to the slim people. Make the point that these chronically disease-ridden “healthy” people are intolerable parasites on society.
Health care, particularly chronic care for an increasingly "grey" population, really is costing more and more. Now that the blame is turned on "healthy" folks, if quid pro quo were to rule, smokers would start HATING the non-smoking parasites, demand preferential smoking areas and all-around preferential treatment on the grounds of their superior contributions to society, never mind smoking outside or being fired if they smoke!
In reality individuals, fat, thin, smoking, non-smoking, live longer or shorter lives based on genes, circumstance, personal constitution, an interplay of thousands of interacting forces, et cetera, ad infinitum. Statistics mean nothing regarding any single individual and most of us die in our seventies or so. The reason is that we are mortal and the point is this: we all deserve respect, none of us is a parasite, we should all care about each other. The hate game has been played on smokers for too long. It’s being played on fat people too. The real answer is not to turn this against everybody else. It’s time to stop hateful games and get back to being human again. How many of you are ready for that?