9 ms·
Is this actually true? It seems to vary significantly by 'sin', and by level of consumption. Many smokers die at a younger age than non-smokers, and so end up
by anon54408900f 5y ago
Is this actually true? It seems to vary significantly by 'sin', and by level of consumption. Many smokers die at a younger age than non-smokers, and so end up financially burdening medicare for a fewer number of years. On the other hand, many other dietary habits that are not currently taxed as 'sins' have a long-term medical cost - e.g. diabetes and heart disease.
- Fogest 5y ago> other dietary habits that are not currently taxed as 'sins' have a long-term medical cost - e.g. diabetes and heart disease. I have expressed this in another comment, but unhealthy foods are taxed here as well. Things like fruits and vegetables are not. However even with the taxes processed foods still end up being more cost effective. But I think that is a separate problem of its own. I am not necessarily sure the argument that they have a shorter lifespan is a good one. Like sure someone may use more if they live 20 years longer, but if you compare two 60 years olds where one is healthy and the other is a heavy smoker it's almost guaranteed that the heavy smoker has costed society a lot more. Is it far to compare that same 60 year old smoker who just died to a 90 year old? That 90 year old got 30 more years of life. Sure they may have ended up costing more in healthcare in those 90 years, but they also alive 30 more years. To me that seems like a positive thing to strive for.