Paul Pelosi violently assaulted in home overnight

I'm not harming anybody but myself. I am very careful not to expose anybody to my second hand smoke.....Mr Pelosi on the other hand can't control his addiction and exposes each and every driver on the road and their family & children to possible injury or death. Are you too stupid to see the difference? Once again I am not saying Mr Pelosi deserves a beating just that I am not going to shed any tears over a person who risks the lives of others for his own pleasures.

 

Mr. Pelosi should have shot him. A hammer is a deadly weapon.

Could you imagine if this douche had broken into a home in a different state? His ass would be well ventilated.

 

Not true. The most complete, peer reviewed research shows that all things considered, smokers are a slight net benefit financially mostly due to the taxes they pay & the SS they don't collect.

 

Yeah, because that scenario makes more sense.

 

That too can be argued. Everybody who reaches old age is sooner or later going to be a drain on the healthcare system....Smokers are simply bringing the end about a little earlier.

 

Feel free to provide some links. The SS they don't collect is a good point though.

 

What about poor smokers who can't pay for their lung disease costs? That cost is absorbed into the general cost of medical services and we pay for it in higher healthcare costs.

 

Smokers have chronic health issues for years before they die, often starting well before they are retired. There is a reason many health insurance plans ask whether you are a smoker or not.

 

And how about those of you who are addicted to food? The rest of us are paying for your diabetes and heart issues. Stop the sillyness. Equating smoking or overeating to driving drunk is not doing any good.

 

and charge you extra if you are.

 

And who pays for all the smokers who don't have health insurance?

 

That's an interesting response. I've always read what the other guys said - that smokers are less expensive to insure because they die younger. Your question makes me wonder if they pay higher private premiums because they're no longer in the same private market once they become eligible for Medicare? Otherwise, you're right that it seem smokers' premiums should be less and not more.

 

You are assuming he is an alcoholic. Assumptions are your ballyhoo not mine. I hope you are correct about not exposing others to the second hand smoke and other garbage from your addiction.

 

I imagine the lost productivity from taking smoke breaks is not factored into this. I am also skeptical that healthcare is paid for.

 

First, I don't over eat, smoke whatever, I don't have an addictive personality. Yes, people addicted to food cost too if they end up with medical issues because of it! My mother has been overweight most of her adult life. She is 88, has a pacemaker, but otherwise in great health. She did stop smoking in her 40's. So what is your point?
I was responding to what you posted about how your smoking, anyone's smoking, is not affecting everyone else. All bad behavior affects the rest of the population.

 

This suggests that even the health care costs for smokers may be less than for non smokers which is astonishing. The study I had in mind is from the mid 1990s American Economic Review. I am at home & cannot access those journals, but if looked at pretty much every possible cost & benefit of smoking including the massive taxes smokers pay & the fact that they die younger.

Smokers may not be financial burden on society

Vanderbilt University economist Kip Viscusi studied the net costs of smoking-related spending and savings and found that for every pack of cigarettes smoked, the country reaps a net cost savings of 32 cents.

 

The thing about a dui is that someone could have two drinks and get pulled over. If I have a glass of wine, I drink it with water and don't have more than one if I'm driving. I've see co workers down 3 and then hit the road. You could make that mistake, get caught, and never do it again. Does Pelosi have a history of it? Or was it one time? If it was the first time at his age, I think it is a one off and a non story. At .082 he was just over the legal limit, not exactly inebriated.

He was a victim in his own home of a radical rightie who wanted to attack his wife. He is still hospitalized and the police have provided all the facts. Not sure why there is a 21 page discussion on it.

 

Lost productivity was a big part of it. FYI, BIG GOV Reagan used to cite the lost productivity due to weed. Years later I found the source. It was from a really bad (par for the course) sociology paper that took pot smokers' salaries & non-pot smokers salaries & extrapolated from there.

further, depending on what you do, cig breaks might add to productivity. breaks in general are good at helping people get unstuck from various problems.

 

It's pretty hard to capture all of the costs and savings for something like this. Here's a cost that I doubt is getting fully captured: People spend thousands of dollars per year on smoking. Half a pack per day would be about $1277 per year. What is the opportunity cost of that? If they spent that money on their education or their kids' educations or if they spent it on something else that is more beneficial to society than a pack of cigarettes?

 

def very difficult. But, even in your example you are leaving out the happiness that smokers get from smoking. I've had some epic cigarettes. Just recently, I've enjoyed some nicotine vaping. red Rocks on 10/10 being A+++