Who do you trust more ?

May 26, 2006 4:47 PM

Who do you trust more ? Smokers or Non-Smokers ?

I have my own business here. On average about 5% of my customers default in their payments when the job is on credit. The amazing pattern about this is that all of these people have been (well are) smokers.

Now If someone asks me to have the job done on credit and I see an ashtray or ciggie packet nearby. I refuse them point blank. I know its sounds crazy but I just dont take the chance anymore.

In fact, I would go as far as to say If I were buying a new house or car and the salesperson was a smoker - they would just lose credibility with me.

I am nothing against smoking per se. If someone lit up beside be in a restaurant - I would not be that bothered. In fact on a social level - smokers are fun people. Its just that smoking for me has just become synonymous with untrustworthy people.

Whats your opinion ?

posted by jacobean to human relations (34 comments total)

So the other 95% of your customers are all non-smokers?
posted by utsutsu at 4:51 PM on May 26, 2006

Off the cuff: It's probably a coincidence. It's likely too small a sample size to be meaningful, and there have to be tons of false negatives (ie, people that don't make their smoking accoutrements visible).
posted by danb at 4:55 PM on May 26, 2006

You would have a lot of trouble doing business in China with that attitude :P

I smoke and am able to find work, albeit not on credit, so I hope that I am at least marginally trustworthy. And my friends who smoke are in my opinion more trustworthy than myself.

I would say don't judge someone just by one habit they have. It used to be that most folks smoked. Look for other indicators of trustworthyness. Do they get nervous and not look you in the eye when they are making a promise or a commitment? Or if they do it in a plaintive manner, I have found that it is a better indication. I've actually asked someone to do something and they almost feel like they are being attacked and need to throw it back in my face. The two times this happened the people turned out to be quite untrustworthy. Neither smoked. Your mileage, as always, may vary.
posted by tweak at 4:58 PM on May 26, 2006

I think we need more information. How many customers do you have? What percentage of them smoke? We need to perform error analysis on this.

I would probably trust a nonsmoker more. In this day and age, someone who smokes is probably aware that smoking is unhealthy, and they're either throwing caution to the wind or have not had the (admittedly, extremely strong) self-discipline needed to quit.
posted by needs more cowbell at 4:59 PM on May 26, 2006

(I should add that that's the decision I'd make if that was the ONLY information I had to go on. )
posted by needs more cowbell at 5:00 PM on May 26, 2006

It doesn't mean that the other 95% of jacobean's customers are non-smokers. It just means that ALL non-smokers pay their bills, and only MOST of the smokers do.

It's still probably just coincidence.
posted by clh at 5:02 PM on May 26, 2006

I think that even after you eliminate smokers as businesspeople, you'll still see 5% of people default with jobs on credit.
posted by pieoverdone at 5:10 PM on May 26, 2006

Think about it this way – what sort of causal connexion do you think could exist here?
posted by ed\26h at 5:12 PM on May 26, 2006

I tend to trust ex-smokers. In the Middle East during Ramadan once I met with a middle-aged heavy smoker. He began our meeting by apologizing: his attempts to not smoke during the fasting period made him intensely uncomfortable in the afternoons and his attention might wander.

I liked him both for his sincere attempt at not smoking, and his courtesy--and particularly when it turned out that he wasn't very religious, but was fasting out of consideration for his employees.
posted by Phred182 at 5:17 PM on May 26, 2006

You would have a lot of trouble doing business in China with that attitude :P

You would have a lot of trouble doing business in Japan with that attitude, too!

I don't get it. If you "have nothing against smoking," then why do you think "smokers are untrustworthy people"? Isn't it kind of an extreme generalization to say that *all* smokers lack discipline and are therefore untrustworthy? I'm a non-smoker, but I don't mind smokers as long as they follow basic manners, like not smoking while they walk in front of me, or when there are kids around, or not tossing the butt onto the street when they're finished, etc. etc. If they're adults, and if they're responsible about it, I think that in itself shows that they can be untrustworthy. But then, I'm in Japan, where smokers abound, so maybe I'm resigned to being tolerant about it.
posted by misozaki at 5:18 PM on May 26, 2006

what sort of causal connexion do you think could exist here?

That's not difficult. Smokers are (almost certainly) more likely to be poorer and from lower-SES occupations and backgrounds, and such people are probably more likely to default.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 5:18 PM on May 26, 2006

can be *trustworthy* sorry.
posted by misozaki at 5:20 PM on May 26, 2006

The only connection here is one of confirmation bias and inadaquate sampling.
posted by A frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter. at 5:23 PM on May 26, 2006

Smokers break the law every time they toss their dirty butts on the ground. That kind of routine littering to me signals a general lack of concern. And, it may well be thay have less self-discipline than non-smokers and that trait might extend to the discipline to prioritize debt repayment.

But yeah, uh, more sampling is definitely needed. These traits might only emerge in a large sample and have relatively low predicitve value for any single smoker, or nonsmoker.
posted by Rumple at 5:39 PM on May 26, 2006

Neal Boortz hates smokers. If that's not enough to change your opnion jacobean, I don't know what will.
posted by tweak at 5:40 PM on May 26, 2006

as a smoker, i should say that i don't trust non-smokers. too little smoking for my taste.
posted by shmegegge at 5:44 PM on May 26, 2006

On average about 5% of my customers default in their payments when the job is on credit. The amazing pattern about this is that all of these people have been (well are) smokers.

One question you might ask yourself is, How many people who don't default on their credit are smokers?
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 5:45 PM on May 26, 2006

Smoking, to me, goes along with a lack of intelligence, la ack of self control and a lot of denial. Not good qualities for a credit risk.
posted by trii at 5:49 PM on May 26, 2006

Smokers break the law every time they toss their dirty butts on the ground. That kind of routine littering to me signals a general lack of concern. And, it may well be thay have less self-discipline than non-smokers and that trait might extend to the discipline to prioritize debt repayment.

On the other hand, non-smokers are patronizing, smug and nosy. They wish to keep up the appearance that they are somehow better than their non-smoking bretheren. That kind of insecurity coupled with the need to prove they're better than everyone else might lead them to find other outlets to exemplify their attitudes. Thus, they pay their bills on time with the hope that the "other guy" will slip up, or have a mortgage payment that takes priority, or fall ill and have to go to a doctor, and then miss a payment.

False assumptions can easily lead one to false conclusions.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 5:51 PM on May 26, 2006

like not smoking while they walk in front of me

if you don't like walking behind a smoker either slow down so you're not behind them or speed up and get in front of them. how is a smoker to accomodate you if they don't know your individual preferences?

my credit rating is top notch, i always pay my bills on time, and i smoke. go figure.
posted by brandz at 5:56 PM on May 26, 2006

MeTa.
posted by A frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter. at 6:04 PM on May 26, 2006

brantz: You're right, I was talking about acquaintances not strangers, but on the other hand I still don't see why you have to smoke while you're walking, either. Why should *I* (non-smoker) have to accomodate you (smoker)? Not that I have anything against you personally. And this has nothing to do with with the question and I have a feeling this thread isn't going to go anywhere, so I'll shut up now.
posted by misozaki at 6:05 PM on May 26, 2006

Thus, they pay their bills on time with the hope that the "other guy" will slip up, or have a mortgage payment that takes priority, or fall ill and have to go to a doctor, and then miss a payment.

Therefore, don't lend money to a smoker. It's cool this is such an agreeable thread.
posted by Rumple at 6:09 PM on May 26, 2006

I'll go first.
posted by atrazine at 6:11 PM on May 26, 2006

I have my own business here. On average about 5% of my customers default in their payments when the job is on credit. The amazing pattern about this is that all of these people have been (well are) smokers.

Are any of the defaulting customers Scientologists, transvestites or professional disco dancers? We need more demographic informationen before we answer.
posted by Pock Suppet at 6:18 PM on May 26, 2006

The only connection here is one of confirmation bias and inadaquate sampling.

How simultaneously methodical and reactionary of you.
posted by Hildago at 6:19 PM on May 26, 2006

How much credit are you talking about here? The sensible thing to do would be to pull someone's credit After all, if someone has excellent credit and pays all their creditors on time then they'll probably pay you even if they smoke.

On the other hand, non-smokers can also have bad credit.

In your situation, if someone asks me to do a job on credit, charge him or her whatever it costs to pull their credit, and then pull their credit. Go based on that, rather then some external thing like smoking.
posted by delmoi at 6:21 PM on May 26, 2006

delmoi: he didn't ask how reasonable people handle credit. He asked about one very specific, and extraordinarily bizarre factor.

Please stay on-topic.
posted by A frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter. at 6:24 PM on May 26, 2006

Why should *I* (non-smoker) have to accomodate you (smoker)?

well, you could accomodate me by spelling my name correctly, dick head.
posted by brandz at 6:24 PM on May 26, 2006

Why has this thread gone utterly insane?
posted by ed\26h at 6:33 PM on May 26, 2006

Why has this thread gone utterly insane?

Because frothyman is doing an flamme out. See MeTa thread.
posted by Pock Suppet at 6:37 PM on May 26, 2006

brandz: In case you're stll following this trainwreck, I apologize, I didn't mean to offend you, really.
posted by misozaki at 6:44 PM on May 26, 2006

confirmation bias
posted by martinX's bellbottoms at 7:01 PM on May 26, 2006

I trust this is not going well.
posted by caddis at 7:49 PM on May 26, 2006