Why would a nationalized tobacco industry
say smoking prevents ulcers, reduces the risk of Parkinson's disease,
relieves schizophrenia, boosts brain cells,
speeds up thinking, improves reactions, increases work efficiency
and eliminates loneliness and depression?
We know smoking tobacco is not good for kids,
but a lot of other things aren't good.
Drinking's not good.
Some would say milk's not good.
Why would a study indirectly funded by tobacco interests
suggest savings from not having to pay smokers pensions and benefits
outweighs short term health care costs
when tobacco tax revenues are included?
I contribute to the stability of the state budget.
By buying cigarettes I increase state revenues and I will die of lung cancer,
so the state won't have to pay me a pension.
Former Czech Prime Minister Milos Zeman
If most smokers die about 10 years earlier than non-smokers,
and more Americans started smoking,
would taxpayers pay less for short-term medical costs
than for long-term Social Security and Medicaid benefits?
If some wanted to increase tax revenues
to improve the nations financial condition
by motivating more Americans to smoke
would they tell everybody?
It is more profitable for your congressman to support the tobacco industry
than your life.
Could smoking be considered patriotic?