home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: uk.misc
- Path: sparky!uunet!pipex!warwick!fulcrum!igb
- From: igb@fulcrum.co.uk (Ian G Batten)
- Subject: Re: Those inscrutable cigarette adverts
- Message-ID: <C1Eyrr.4wn@fulcrum.co.uk>
- Sender: news@fulcrum.co.uk
- Organization: Fulcrum Communications
- References: <727568003snx@brite.demon.co.uk> <1993Jan25.125128.7420@visionware.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 14:26:15 GMT
- Lines: 28
-
- In article <1993Jan25.125128.7420@visionware.co.uk> andyy@visionware.co.uk (Andy Yates) writes:
- > should consider this. Or perhaps the government could pay some of the
- > excessive amounts of duty they accrue from idiots like myself being hooked
- > towards the fund. (Tongue in cheek idealism methinks).
-
- I'm a strong supporter of people smoking. Lots and lots of untipped
- extra strong, for preference. Even if the government collected far less
- duty than they do, smoking will still reduce the country's social
- security burden.
-
- As more and more diseases which kill people in the fifties and sixties
- have their incidence reduced, more and more people are living to ripe
- old ages. This costs serious money: penions, care of the elderly, etc.
- This will become a larger problem over time as greater proportions of
- the population are non-workers.
-
- If people choose to do something that will greatly incraese their
- mortality rates at about sixty it reduces the problem, yes? Even
- better, the only part of society increasing its incidence of smoking is
- young women --- the very group that would otherwise have the longest
- lives.
-
- From a strictly economic point of view (and it's so nice to see you
- again, Mr Bentham) smoking is an excellent idea. And it's taxed as
- well!
-
- ian
-
-