Showing posts with label smoke em if you got em. Show all posts
Showing posts with label smoke em if you got em. Show all posts

Thursday, May 30, 2013

At the University of Chicago, it's no longer "sink or swim"

From 1954 til now, you had to be able to swim to graduate from the University of Chicago.

I am not making this up.

At Cornell, Dartmouth, Columbia, MIT and Notre Dame you still do.

Here's what UC alum Hassan Ali had to say about his experience:

"Entering college is intimidating enough, let alone getting half-naked in front of your peers and trying to prove your physical acumen,"

And here's what the great Christopher Zorn had to say about Mr. Ali's quote:

"For those of us who didn't attend U of C, that was known as the "good part" of college".

Proving that Public Choice is everywhere, the article did find someone in favor of this ridiculous policy:

Fred DeBruyn, aquatics director and assistant physical education director at Cornell, said the swim tests served a valuable purpose: preventing drowning.

Not to mention helping to fund Mr. DeBruyn!




Friday, April 12, 2013

Insurance Companies Can't Charge More to Smokers

So we have all sorts of programs to discourage smoking, based on price.  We tax cigarettes, and we do it at the federal level, but we also do it at state and local levels.  Here is a map of the level of taxes on a pack of coffin nails.

So, as Art Carden says in his haikus (which he spells hiakus....), "Tax something, and you will get less of it."  I'm not sure this is an appropriate use of the tax system, to promote or discourage particular behaviors, but okay.

Still, there is surely one place where having differences in prices for smokers makes sense, right?  In insurance.  Overall, the costs of smokers may even be less than other people, because they die younger.  But in the coming year, if you are 50, the likelihood that you will need medical treatment for all sorts of things is higher if you smoke than if you don't.

But....but....but....the DC Health Commisariate, which taxes smokers extra, just for recreation, refuses to allow insurance companies to charge more for the actual higher costs that smokers impose on the health system per year.  They say the cost is "prohibitive."  But....but....but...if it is THAT expensive, why does it follow that the people who cause the cost shouldn't have to pay it?

A nod to MH

UPDATE:  spelling corrected to "hiakus"

Wednesday, January 02, 2013

Smokin' Hot Policy Choices

Two studies on tobacco control policies.  Interesting.  Pretty long, though, so I put them after the jump.

Friday, August 10, 2012

When people were shorter and lived by the water

Check out these amazing black and white photos from Buzzfeed.


Which shot of a little kid smoking do you prefer and why?




Or maybe those aren't little kids at all?? Maybe that's just a VERY BIG CHICKEN?