Anyone ever wonder how much is costs to treat lung cancer? Emphasema(sp)?
Why can't the tobacco companies pay for the health care costs associated with tobacca addiction?
Why should people that don't smoke have to bear increasing insurance costs for a entirely preventalbe illness like lung cancer?
Why should they? No one is forcing anyone to smoke cigarettes.
And in case you haven't noticed smokers do pay higher premiums.
Why should they you ask. Well how about the fact that they knowingly sell a product that addicts and kills.
If tobacco were just discoverd today, with its posions and addictive properites, guess what, it would either be well regulated or outlawed.
However, what I intended to say was that the tobacco companies should raise their prices to the point where they could pay for smokers health issues. That way, in fact the smoker would be paying for his/her own addiction and treatment.
Why the hell should I pay for it through increased premiums for ever increasing health care costs. Build the health care costs into the product.
Then the people that choose not to smoke are not somewhat forced to cover the health care of people that choose to smoke.
If that won't work, then refuse to offer medical treatment to smokers. You want to cut health care costs or not? You want to cut smoking rates. Tell a smoker no health care for your smoking related illness.
You don't want to tell people they can't smoke. Yet you know smoking causes severe illness, then you want everybody else to share in the health care costs of people that choose to kill themselves through smoking.
That don't make sense. Oh wait, I know, it's a Capitalist thingy. Don't make a capitalist company responsible for their product. It ain't very American to do that.
