| |
|
|
|
|
Share/Bookmark this Topic:
|
| Message |
Author |
by activist0000
on Sat May 30, 2009 4:12 pm |
|
What exactly is "lost productivity" in relation to the estimates made about smoking's cost to society? Does anyone know how this figure is calculated?
Is it based on a worker's total estimated lifetime wages? Or does this figure somehow come from employers? Do employers report their smoking-related absences, extra breaks, sick days, etc?
How can you lose something that never existed?
If the figure is based on an employee's estimated lifetime wages, then the assumption is that an individual OWES it to society to contribute the maximum amount of productivity they can possibly contribute over the course of their whole lifetime. I thought working was voluntary.
Also, the calculation would probably assume the person would not be otherwise laid off, incapacitated or experience wage setbacks before retirement. In reality, many people experience downward mobility as they get older and often lose their jobs for other reasons, such as employers wanting to eliminate senior workers to keep their payroll costs down.
Does anyone have any information on this subject? |
|
|
activist0000
Toker
Joined: May 26, 2009
Posts: 86
|
| |
Back to top |
|
|
| |
|
by libertarian99
on Sun May 31, 2009 11:12 pm |
|
activist0000 wrote: What exactly is "lost productivity" in relation to the estimates made about smoking's cost to society? Does anyone know how this figure is calculated?
Is it based on a worker's total estimated lifetime wages? Or does this figure somehow come from employers? Do employers report their smoking-related absences, extra breaks, sick days, etc?
How can you lose something that never existed?
If the figure is based on an employee's estimated lifetime wages, then the assumption is that an individual OWES it to society to contribute the maximum amount of productivity they can possibly contribute over the course of their whole lifetime. I thought working was voluntary.
In real life, many people experience downward mobility as they get older and often lose their jobs for other reasons, such as employers wanting to eliminate senior workers to keep their payroll costs down.
Does anyone have any information on this subject?
http://www.sptimes.com/2005/07/01/Worldandnation/Deaths_from_smoking_c.shtml
I'm not sure how they decide how many years of work are lost because it's hard to find figures that agree on exactly what the average lifespan of a smoker is versus a non-smoker, or what the average retirement age is. I would say the people doing the calculating probably assume that each person would continue working until normal retirement age, and for roughly the same wages, had they not died prematurely.
In reality, many people are forced out of their jobs -- or bought out -- before they reach retirement anyway. And many older people, after losing jobs, end up working for low wages. But there is no need to stick to reality when making these calculations, because we will never know what really would have happened to the individuals who died prematurely. That means you can just make things up and hope no one will think very hard about your calculations.
The other component is based on absence rates between smokers and non-smokers. The difference is about one day per year of extra sick leave taken, so the people who are calculating assume that extra day is due to smoking-related issues and therefore a cost of smoking.
I’m not sure how they get any realistic measures of sick days taken across all different types of jobs. There are often differences in the number of sick days employees are entitled to and a lot of people just take the maximum number of sick days allowed, whether or not they’re ill. But it incriminates the smokers if you assume they are all at home in bed with a smoking-related illness on that one extra day per year. And you can pretend all the non-smokers are sitting at their desks working diligently during that same time period, because we can’t know for sure whether or not the non-smokers are really sitting at their desks watching YouTube.
It seems odd that parents with small children aren’t at the top of the list in the “absences” category, but who knows? Maybe it’s just my imagination that parents are always checking out early to pick up their kids, or maybe leaving a half-hour early to pick up kids from day care doesn’t count as an absence.
Smoke breaks are another factor that is calculated in. It’s assumed that during the time that smokers are taking a smoke break, non-smokers are sitting at their desk working diligently. They could be just sitting at their desks staring at the computer screen and randomly clicking the mouse, but that’s okay because they manage to fool the estimators, and that’s what counts.
At any rate, all anyone has to do is throw out a big figure and the sheeple will accept it without question, obediently repeating whatever they are told in the name of conformity and political correctness. |
|
|
libertarian99
Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: May 01, 2009
Posts: 453
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by Jellytoad
on Mon Jun 01, 2009 1:45 pm |
|
| Usually when I miss a day of work it's because of too much beer the night before. Haven't missed any work because of any other reason (health related) for so long I can's remember! I have noticed lots of days missed from non-smoking coworkers in the meantime! |
|
|
Jellytoad
Newbie
Joined: Feb 10, 2009
Posts: 11
Location: Lincoln
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
|
|
