Economics of smoking
Socialist Organiser1983 1983-05-12Read it in the scan (PDF), scan page 13 →
Read from the scan by machine and not corrected: expect misread words, and now and then a caption or a line from a neighbouring story. For anything you quote, read the scan.
Scan page 13
I THOUGHT I would write and tell you some more information on why the government doesn't hold big anti-smoking campaigns. Perhaps, like myself, more readers will try to give it up and donate the money to SO!
On talking to a heart and lung specialist the other day, I was intrigued to find out that it is much cheaper for the government to let everyone kill themselves by smoking - and his arguments did not include the revenue from tobacco tax.
1) People die earlier and thus do not claim pensions.
2) Diseases caused by smoking kill people off relatively quickly, and NHS treatment is cheap, compared to, say, the cost of looking after someone with senile dementia for 15 years. Not much can be done for someone with lung cancer - the treatment probably only costs £5,000.
The types of heart disease caused by smoking usually kill people in their sixties or early seventies - and really is quite cost-effective!
Tax : They have prot their treatment tobacco tax - plus government from sions. ibly pai 1 for by ıyıng they sav ethe Wing penSmoking is supposed to shorten your life by 2-5 years. So five years of old age pension is approximately £15,000.
With the elderly population on the increase, smoking as a revenue saving voluntary euthanasia scheme must seem attractive to the government. "smoke more - die younger and faster for your country!"
MARY IRESON, Cardiff Send letters to Socialist Organiser 28 Middle Lane, London N8. No longer than 400 words, please: longer letters are liable to be cut.