in case you don’t want to read all of my explanatory diatribe for asking this question, the link to the article in question is here: http://license.icopyright.net/user/viewFreeUse.act?fuid=MzE0MTAzOQ==
reasons for asking:
1 out of 5 american adults smokes–cigarettes, pipes, and/or cigars. by so doing, this 1/5 of the adult american population sustains numerous governmental agencies via the taxes assessed on tobacco products, made from a legal crop which is also, at times, subsidized by the government to ensure that no glut of tobacco products is on the marketplace at any given time, so that the growers make a living.
now then, since the stimulus package [moneys] that will be disbursed in 2010 includes language that will require that my, and your, health records will all be contained in a federal government database on the ridiculous assumption that we are too stupid to avoid duplicate medical testing (like i will not tell one of my doctors to share blood test results recently prescribed by one of my other doctors), i know that the federal government will know that i choose to smoke cigarettes.
to those of you that do not smoke, i say, yes, that is fine, that is your choice, and that if my smoking my cigarettes aggravates you, i will not smoke near you.
but you who do not smoke say that smokers are a financial burden on society because studies show that all smokers and some people exposed to secondhand smoke get sick more often and are subject to getting serious diseases and then dying before you would die, given that you do not smoke.
so, you who do not smoke may say that it should be law that i do not get an operation, for example, a hip replacement (this happens in the socialized medicine country of england all the time, therefore, our doctors perform hip replacements on british smokers at their cost since they are denied this surgery at home, but a younger britain, who does not smoke, is given a hip replacement in place of the one that smokes) if i am around the age of 65 since then the health benefit that i get from being able to walk without constant pain will be ‘wasted’ since i may die sooner than you who do not smoke. (but i may not die sooner–smokers that began to smoke in their youth and that drink alcohol every day can sometimes live beyond 100 years, and when asked how they got to be so old, they sometimes attribute it to smoking and to drinking alcohol)!
however, actuary tables prove to insurance companies that i will die sooner, therefore, they make my premiums higher to cover illnesses that they have presumed to be linked to smoking–all illnesses. yes indeed, all illnesses and all diseases are assumed to at least be complicated by the fact that a smoker smokes tobacco products.
laura bush smokes cigarettes and so does barrack obama. hmmm, not very politically popular, correct? but it is a known fact that smoking cigarettes is the worst addiction that anyone can have including addictions to heroin or cocaine. doctors, many years ago, would threaten their smoker patients that if they did not stop smoking they refused to treat them; however, in time, the addiction was made clear to these doctors, therefore, they simply tell their smoker patients that it would be good to quit.
i concede that my smoking irritates you non smokers as well as that i concede that perhaps my smoking will be the death of me. but i ask you, is my smoking cigarettes such a bad thing that it will prevent you from getting health care that you must have because i am given health care that i must have?
finally, a true cost analysis has been done that illustrates that smokers actually save you non smokers from paying higher insurance premiums as well as that we give you our old age benefits because we die sooner than you do.
this study is here:
http://license.icopyright.net/user/viewFreeUse.act?fuid=MzE0MTAzOQ==
this study verifies what some folks like me have thought all along, through the smoking debate: you, a non smoker, will have more money and health care benefits, and do also get more benefits from the taxes that i pay on my tobacco products (all sorts of benefits, such as paved roads and “better education” for your children–run by the federal government now and not by the states, which is where school issues should be decided).
and so, based on this study, do you think that when i reach age 65 and need surgery, i should be denied this surgery because my smoking has damaged my body, therefore, that i do not deserve the surgery?
should politicians, like former first ladies and former presidents, who do not pay social security taxes but who get a far, far, far better health care and retirement package for serving in government, at our expense (except ron paul, who refuses to participate in such government plan when he leaves his US house of representatives office), be denied necessary medical care and/or surgery when they are older so that other p
THEY LEFT THIS OUT:
And, should politicians, like former first ladies and former presidents, who do not pay social security taxes but who get a far, far, far better health care and retirement package for serving in government, at our expense (except ron paul, who refuses to participate in such government plan when he leaves his US house of representatives office), be denied necessary medical care and/or surgery when they are older so that other politicians and other former first ladies and other former presidents, and so on, who never smoked or used tobacco products (but who might have drunk or still drink alcohol–a known recreational drug of choice, taxed far less than tobacco products–by most of these politicians since most of them are attorneys who always have a well stocked liquor cabinet in their office as well as, usually, a stash bottle in their lower desk drawer–i know, i was a legal secretary at one time), JUST A MINUTE, THEY LEFT OUT THE REST…
THEY LEFT THIS OUT:
And, should politicians, like former first ladies and former presidents, who do not pay social security taxes but who get a far, far, far better health care and retirement package for serving in government, at our expense (except ron paul, who refuses to participate in such government plan when he leaves his US house of representatives office), be denied necessary medical care and/or surgery when they are older so that other politicians and other former first ladies and other former presidents, and so on, who never smoked or used tobacco products (but who might have drunk or still drink alcohol–a known recreational drug of choice, taxed far less than tobacco products–by most of these politicians since most of them are attorneys who always have a well stocked liquor cabinet in their office as well as, usually, a stash bottle in their lower desk drawer–i know, i was a legal secretary at one time), JUST A MINUTE, THEY LEFT OUT THE REST…
DAMN!: all so that the others in their league (line of work) will attain more benefit from health care given/surgeries? what about them? (oh, also, will their health records also be in the new federal database so that their doctors do not duplicate testing)?
when you answer, please indicate your age, whether or not you smoke tobacco products (and which ones you do), and if, in your estimation, you live in a polluted environment–for instance, air polluted cities that have all the pollution given off by anything else that we use in our living other than tobacco products, for instance, pollution from manufacturing or driving.
you’ll have 7 days to answer, of course. and those of you that read what i ask and answer me know that i’ll thumb you down if you leave a nonsense one liner answer. give me your argument please. FEEL FREE TO EDIT BEFORE 7 DAYS IS GONE. thank you.
Clicking advertisements helps keep this site running. thank you!
