Sell your cigarette stocks - smoking to end.

[kwhilborn]

Since you guys are way off topic anyways I'd like to comment on Canadas free healthcare.

I think completely free healthcare gets abused as well. In Canada people go to the doctor for anything from a sniffle to a headache without cost. There should be a service charge like $10 per visit for everyone based on income level.

 

[Billy T]

... I think completely free healthcare gets abused as well. In Canada people go to the doctor for anything from a sniffle to a headache without cost. There should be a service charge like $10 per visit for everyone based on income level.

That happens in the US too - some people seem to think they need to see the doctor often to get their money´s worth from the insurance fees they pay. I had a fat neighbor in US, who if she or her kids did not go visit the doctor several times each month, you could be sure she was actually sick. I suspect the doctor was the only male she could get to physically examiner her (father of her kids had left).

 

[Walter L. Wagner]

Most US medical plans require a 'co-pay' to see the doctor. Otherwise, people would go for the slightest whim. The 'co-pay' is typically $10 to $30, depending on the healthcare plan/company.

 

[Captain Kremmen]

In the UK, it costs nothing to see an NHS doctor.
Every doctor has a few pests, who want to see him once a week.
Worse are the people who don't turn up for appointments.
A bigger problem is people, mainly men, who won't see a doctor at all, even if they have potentially serious symptoms.

I think that final band would increase if people had to pay.

 

[Stryder]

A bigger problem is people, mainly men, who won't see a doctor at all, even if they have potentially serious symptoms.

What's a doctor going to do, warm my coffin for me?

It's very easy to get into the "see a doctor if you have a problem", and before you know it, it's a problem (Hypochondria), funny that, see a doctor enough and end up with a condition, I guess you get what you ask/pay for.

On a more serious note (and more in alignment to the topic), the creation of yet another fad method of dealing with smoking and or it's withdrawal's is just another money spinner, what people really need to realise is the best way of quitting is realising that every coffin nail that you don't smoke is one less penny snatched away from the clutches of the tax man. Quitting is a lot easier if you have some villain that you are giving a pasteing by not full-filling what he want's you to do. (Should work with alcohol too-)

 

[Billy T]

... what people really need to realise is the best way of quitting is realising that every coffin nail that you don't smoke is one less penny snatched away from the clutches of the tax man. Quitting is a lot easier if you have some villain that you are giving a pasteing by not full-filling what he want's you to do. (Should work with alcohol too-)

That works for collecting from paid up life annuities too, especially if like me - really enjoy getting your money´s worth.

When I retired early, about 35 years ago, I put 50K of my retirement funds in paid up annuity. As interest rates were high then they locked up in 30 year bonds at least 8% return and gave me a 7+ % return on my 50K. I was not thinking at the time that a fixed 7% income was a great investment as most, me included, then feared inflation would grow even worse. I bought the annuity to protect me from my possible foolishness in later years (probably associated with some young good looking blond).

Even though I have now collected more than 400K (counting the part my own money coming back to me about $500K now), I´m greedy. I want to get still more from the insurance company. I don´t like insurance companies - never have. I want the bastards to pay, and pay and pay and pay. So am trying my best to live a couple of decades more! (Non´t smoke, swim, eat right, drink in moderation, etc.)

In one decade 50K becomes 100K then in another, its 200K then by end of third decade it is 400K. If I can live 14 years more, they will have given me a million dollars!

 

[Captain Kremmen]

It's very easy to get into the "see a doctor if you have a problem", and before you know it, it's a problem (Hypochondria), funny that, see a doctor enough and end up with a condition, I guess you get what you ask/pay for.

If the doctor gains no financial advantage from your hypochondria, he will not suffer your foolishness gladly.
Indulging people, who wish to believe that their mild ailments are serious illnesses, is quackery,
and I suspect that it causes a greater waste of the average doctor's time in the US than in the UK.

 

[Read-Only]

If the doctor gains no financial advantage from your hypochondria, he will not suffer your foolishness gladly.
Indulging people, who wish to believe that their mild ailments are serious illnesses, is quackery,
and I suspect that it causes a greater waste of the average doctor's time in the US than in the UK.

Actually, I suspect it would be just the opposite in the US/UK. All the medical plans in the US that I'm aware of require a $10 to $30 co-payment while there is none in the UK. So it seems to me that when there's no cost to the individual, they would make more office visits.

And, in addition, while a US doctor may flag an individual as having an imaginary illness and refuse to see him/her, I tend to think they would *have* to accept such a person in the UK since they probably aren't allowed to turn anyone away.

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

In one decade 50K becomes 100K then in another, its 200K then by end of third decade it is 400K. If I can live 14 years more, they will have given me a million dollars!

But you're running a race against inflation. One million dollars is no longer enough money to retire on--at least not here.

Not to mention, interest rates are in the toilet. There's no way to double money in one decade any more, without taking considerable risk.

 

[Billy T]

But you're running a race against inflation. ... There's no way to double money in one decade any more, without taking considerable risk.

Last part is certainly true as FED depresses interest rates to delay collapse of the economy, but I was lucky,* bought my paid up front $50K life annuity at time when inflation was high, so interest rates on 30 year bonds were very high (more than 8%, I´m sure, as the annuity is a contract that gave me a fixed 7.25% return on my 50K as long as I live.) I.e. fact that you can not now invest and get even 2% with 100% safety of principal being repaid (10 year Treausury bond was paying less than 1.4% recently) does lower my 7.25% current and future returns.

* Although at time, ~35 years ago, I already recognized that US was living beyond its means with world accepting printed paper for real goods and services and thus a day of reckoning would come, I like almost everyone back then, thought this meant that inflation** would probably just get worse. (Why Treasury had to pay such high rates to sell its longer term bonds.) - I expected that I would come to regret giving the insurance company $50K with only a fixed 7.25% return. As I stated earlier, I did so to be confident I could live on that return plus my nearly max possible and inflation adjusted Social Security even if I did some really financially stupid things with retirement funds I still had. I.e. it was pure luck, not cleverness, that gave me a safe rate of return several times higher than has been possible for last decade.

** I did not, back then, appreciate the FED´s power of the printing press - It can hold interest rates down, until world realized the dollar is a bad investment to hold. I have long ago posted that that that day will come no later than Halloween 2014. We seem to be right on schedule for that to come true.

BTW, if you want to know how many years it takes to double your money at interest rate I, answer with amazing accuracy for all reasonable I is 72/I. Thus, money earning 7.25% doubles in a few months less than a decade. Also note that insurance company which can accurately project the fixed dollar amount they must payout in some future year, just buys 100% "principle safe" Treasury bonds maturing with than known sum in that year. They don´t care if inflation make what they paid the widow on her dead husband´s $100,000 life insurance policy only buys a nice dinner out. Thus, you need to collect for more than 30 years to hurt the insurance company that covered their future obligations to you with 30 year bonds.

To be slightly on thread, I note that you would need to pay me at least $5 per cigarette I smoked as I hope to hurt the insurance company paying my annuity for another decade at least.

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

To be slightly on thread, I note that you would need to pay me at least $5 per cigarette I smoked as I hope to hurt the insurance company paying my annuity for another decade at least.

Some city councils are trying to levy a tax on tobacco that would raise the price to $2 per cigarette.

America's biggest problem is its short memory. My parents lived through Prohibition in Chicago and saw first-hand what happens when the government in its stupidity shifts a popular commodity to the black market. Just wait until gangsters control the tobacco market--the most addictive drug on earth! It will make the War on Drugs, which we selfishly offloaded to Mexico, look like a playground scuffle.

 

[Aqueous Id]

bump - bot attck.

 

[Billy T]

“…Heartland Institute, is a highly controversial group that pooh-poohs global warming and believes anti-smoking campaigns are based on junk science. But negative publicity over {their} contributions has prompted Bayer, Amgen, Eli Lilly and GlaxoSmithKline to disassociate themselves from the non-profit. ... Pfizer, however, perseveres. In 2010, the drugmaker contributed $130,000, according to a Heartland document and $65,000 last year. Meanwhile, Pfizer expects to contribute another $45,000 this year ... {Heartland does tests, mainly related to heart problem treatments.}

A recent letter signed by more than 2,000 physicians to Pfizer ceo Ian Read notes that “Heartland has a long and disgraceful track record of misleading the public about the overwhelming scientific evidence that cigarette smoking poses significant health risks. The organization has also consistently argued against health-based regulation of tobacco products.”

Now, a group of 41 socially-minded investors and related activists – including Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, Walden Asset Management, Unitarian Universalist Association and AFSCME – have written Bill Gray, a Pfizer board member who chairs the corporate governance committee, in hopes of prompting a change As shareholders, they want the Pfizer board to conduct a comprehensive review to justify its support.

A recent letter signed by more than 2,000 physicians to Pfizer ceo Ian Read notes that “Heartland has a long and disgraceful track record of misleading the public about the overwhelming scientific evidence that cigarette smoking poses significant health risks. The organization has also consistently argued against health-based regulation of tobacco products.”

Pfizer corporate secretary Matt Lepore distributed {letter} to its investor and media teams last February completely omitted mention of Chantix, tobacco or smoking issues … puzzling that Pfizer would support Heartland long after its rivals have abandoned their backing. Perhaps there is a perverse logic at work? Heartland is supported by tobacco interests and the more people who smoke, {making} the greater the demand for {Pfizer´s drug} Chantix? ..."

Photo & text from: http://www.pharmalot.com/2012/08/pressure-grows-on-pfizer-to-abandon-heartland/ {With Billy T inserts in these brackets}

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

Heartland has a long and disgraceful track record of misleading the public about the overwhelming scientific evidence that cigarette smoking poses significant health risks.

This is bad. People have the right to lie to each other, so long as they don't violate the specific restrictions on free speech such as fraud. But that should apply only to individual private citizens. Organizations--which are not citizens and therefore don't have the constitutional rights of citizens, recent idiotic rulings notwithstanding--must be held to a higher standard. They have more power than citizens so that power must be more controlled than the power of citizens.

The organization has also consistently argued against health-based regulation of tobacco products.

On the other hand this is good. The government has no damn business telling us what we can and can't do to our own bodies. Only an individual can decide whether the risk that accrues to any activity is worth the reward that he receives from it. This decision cannot be made sensibly at a community level because we're all quite different from one another.

Make sure everyone is aware of the risks and let them do their own risk/reward analysis. Most Americans do not place a high value on events--good or bad--that will occur very far into the future. Therefore it would be irrational of us to give up pleasure today in order to avoid a statistical risk of disease thirty or forty years from now, and we will never respect a person, organization or government who says that we should.

And if you think we should change, you should stop and think about all the people who were duped into giving up vacations, nice cars, restaurants, entertainment, etc., so they could buy a house that they'd have forever.

 

[Billy T]

... Most Americans do not place a high value on events--good or bad--that will occur very far into the future. ...

That is called a "high discount rate." It is a characteristic of nations (and people) who don´t advance much (or even go bust). Saving and investing for future gains is low when the discount rate is high. Decades ago, the US had a low discount rate and prospered. On average, the further you (or a nation) is from the equator, the lower the discount rate is - I think this is because people there know that winter will come and end the easy living of summer - that they must plan for the future. Now too many Americas do not. - Average saving for Americans, their net worth, in the 40 to 50 year range is only $26,000! -Far too little an indicates a very high discount rate.

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

That is called a "high discount rate." It is a characteristic of nations (and people) who don´t advance much (or even go bust). Saving and investing for future gains is low when the discount rate is high. Decades ago, the US had a low discount rate and prospered. On average, the further you (or a nation) is from the equator, the lower the discount rate is - I think this is because people there know that winter will come and end the easy living of summer - that they must plan for the future. Now too many Americas do not. - Average saving for Americans, their net worth, in the 40 to 50 year range is only $26,000! -Far too little an indicates a very high discount rate.

As I said, many Americans saved for the future in the way their parents did, and in the way most Americans have done for three generations: buying a house. Not only did they lose their money, but they also lost the value of forgoing the happy memories they could have formed by spending that money on frivolous consumption.

That was a powerful lesson. It may take a generation or more before my people trust the future. This is why the discount rate will remain low.

With every passing year, Americans seem to live by the financial advice I heard on a TV comedy series many years ago (unfortunately I didn't write down the name of the show or the person who said it, so forgive the absence of attribution):

The only money you can never lose is the money you've already spent.​

My wife says I'm ahead of my time, because I've spent my whole life living by that rule.