https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nearly-half-of-u-s-cancer-deaths-blamed-on-unhealthy-behavior/
Morons who smoke should pay for their extra care BEFORE they croak.
Morons who smoke should pay for their extra care BEFORE they croak.
Right they simply pass away instead of medicare paying for them to be in a nursing home, they will likely have to in the future the day you go to the social security office to sign up and get your first retirement check hand you a carton of camels and say enjoy, it's cheaper in the long run.And they have shorter lives, pay a lot of tobacco tax and less expensive deaths than many. Geriatric care for the elderly is extremely expensive.
Smokers & the obese are cheaper to care for:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html
Alcohol, Obesity and Smoking Do Not Cost Health Care Systems Money
https://www.forbes.com/forbes/welco....google.com/&referrer=https://www.google.com/
My own mother died of lung cancer at 70, absolutely related to smoking. I feel her loss all the time so don't think I am being glib. Since antibiotics mostly have completely transformed the demographic for the elderly we need better solutions for the 2030 geriatric boomer timebomb. AI should play a significant part of this.
Right they simply pass away instead of medicare paying for them to be in a nursing home, they will likely have to in the future the day you go to the social security office to sign up and get your first retirement check hand you a carton of camels and say enjoy, it's cheaper in the long run.
Here is your retirement check, here are your Camels might not go down so well but there is a huge problem.Uh they already do pay more soes, you can get reductions in premiums if you change your lifestyle.
They don't pay enough MORE. They should pay more until they cant afford that $15 pack of cigarettes.
Many on the right (and middle and left) looked in some horror at Angela Merkel being seemingly so soft on asylum seekers. The EU had many options but it seemed the 'liberal loonies' had lost the plot. The reality is a little different. Germany has a massive demographic problem like the US, way too many elderly, not enough kids. If white Germans are not having enough kids do the oligarchs care where the labor comes from to protect their interests?
.
You are giving the official party line explanation of why Merkel was allegedly soft on the asylum seekers. ie. that the asylum seekers needed a better life and Germany needed more workers.
In reality, the German government, the German banks, the EU, and Goldman Sachs had created a debtor's prison/colony of Germany commonly known as Greece. As you will recall, just days/weeks before the asylum seekers came en masse, Angela put her boot on the neck of Greece to the point of humiliating them. She rapidly became known around the world as a wicked witch- not the legacy she hoped for. In addition, Germany did not really accept the asylum seekers. They just arrived in an unstoppable volume that would have required a military operation to stop. To have taken aggressive action would have made her seem even more heartless at a time when she was seen a cold hearted bitch as a result of her humiliation of Greece. So she suddenly became Angela the Humanitarian- not something she is good at. And the whole refugee crisis turned into an even worse disaster- and she only recovered when she started deporting people before the election to avoid a severe beating at the polls.
But the idea that she planfully was taking steps to acquire new workers is a stretch. Similarly, the united states needs more workers but not necessarily those who arrive - shall we say- uninvited. The leftards like to say that America is a land founded by immigrants. True, but legal immigrants- not Salvadoran drug dealers and gangs. Germany still needs more workers, but they just sent a pantload of refugees back. There is a reason for that.