Comments on: Bondi Goes To Court For Tobacco Payments

By: nod

nod — Wed, 25 Jan 2017 19:30:49 +0000

I think the whole thing stinks. Everyone knows that smoklng is bad for you and yet they do it. Why should anyone or any state be compensated. Its is not the tobacco industries fault if you choose to smoke no more that the guy that makes gunpowder is responsible for gun violence.

By: Sedition

Sedition — Tue, 24 Jan 2017 02:18:46 +0000

k
“A rose by any other name would smell as sweet”

It’s extortion.

By: k

Tue, 24 Jan 2017 01:44:46 +0000

@Sedition The legal protections are spelled out in the article. The state uses the money to pay for health care expenses related to smoking, and the company cannot be sued.

the legal protections were worked into the original settlement.

the company needed the legal protections against lawsuits so that it could continue to operate.

what’s better: drive the company out of business on liability claims, or protect the company so that it can pay tens of millions a year for years to come in a leveraged payment plan?

on the leveraged payment, everyone “wins.” the state has the money to pay for insurance claims related to smokers, the citizens are protected from a company that sold cigarettes that were altered to be deliberately addicting, and the company is allowed to continue operation as long as the new product meets requirements and they pay their share of the assessed penalty.

By: A

Mon, 23 Jan 2017 12:19:50 +0000

Go Pam Bondi! Florida thanks you.

By: Sedition

Sedition — Sun, 22 Jan 2017 23:48:42 +0000

“The 1997 settlement required certain major tobacco companies, including R.J. Reynolds, to make annual payments to the state in exchange for legal protections.”
Isn’t that considered extortion?
Oh, wait…if the Government does it, it’s legal.