Neither of those links gives any data about the costs of smoking, what do you propose the costs are? I thought smokers cost governments less then the average person.
> However, smokers die some 10 years earlier than nonsmokers, according to the CDC, and those premature deaths provide a savings to Medicare, Social Security, private pensions and other programs.
> Vanderbilt University economist Kip Viscusi studied the net costs of smoking-related spending and savings and found that for every pack of cigarettes smoked, the country reaps a net cost savings of 32 cents.
There's an overview with data and sources in another section of the website [1].
I think the key difference in Australia and USA is that the Australian government, due to our extensive Medicare coverage [2], bears most of healthcare burden for smokers. Thus, for Australians, paying for smokers' medical costs nearing their end of life is more expensive than keeping them healthy.
>Some researchers have estimated that the lifetime health care costs for smokers are lower than for non-smokers. In the models these researchers used, the health care cost savings attributed to smokers' premature death from smoking-associated illnesses more than offset their higher annual medical costs.39,40 Other analysts have found the reverse—that although smokers do, on average, die earlier than people who have never smoked, this 'saving' in terms of medical expenditures does not fully offset their higher medical costs—the lifetime medical costs for smokers are higher than for non-smokers.
> However, smokers die some 10 years earlier than nonsmokers, according to the CDC, and those premature deaths provide a savings to Medicare, Social Security, private pensions and other programs.
> Vanderbilt University economist Kip Viscusi studied the net costs of smoking-related spending and savings and found that for every pack of cigarettes smoked, the country reaps a net cost savings of 32 cents.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-04-08-fda-to...