Top court rules B.C. can sue tobacco companies

[kestra]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...hub=TopStories

Thoughts??

[Gromgor]

Once again legislation removes your need to think before you act.

[kestra]

I have to agree.

[Lokrian]

I don't keep up with the whole tobacco issue and don't really smoke much. Usually a cigar or 5 during the period right from Thanksgiving to New Years, and maybe a tin of pipe tobacco or two at that time as well. But I think the issue revolves at least partially around early industry attempts to deny the affects of smoking and then known attempts to market to the young.

If that is actually what's driving it all, I don't have a problem with the law suits. If it's not, well... The problem is it is hard for me to get excited about defending tobacco. On the other hand, the whole issue of the "Nanny State", I forget who coined that term, annoys me. Can't childproof the whole planet.

[Khirmint]

Originally posted by Gromgor
Once again legislation removes your need to think before you act.

I don't see how this is the case. With medicare, each individual pays a flat rate regardless of the amount of care that they use. For the most part at least.

How is the government recouping losses in such a way have anything to do with people being less accountable for their decisions? They'll get the same care and suffer the same consequences regardless.

[kestra]

The only problem I have is people who attempt to sue the tobacco industry because their products give them diseases.
Nobody in this modern day and age can claim ignorance to the harmful effects of smoking; that includes servers who develop diseases as a result of second hand smoke, yet refuse to get a different job.
If there is any legitimacy behind the charges of the tobacco companies purposely targetting teens(and why wouldn't they? all businesses develop business strategies, and target markets) or hiding incriminating research, then I say nail them to the wall.

[Aristotle]

In these lawsuits against tobacco companies, as long as the SMOKERS themselves get nothing, I can see the point of them.

However, there needs to be something set in advance that says the lawyers can only get like 5% of the final reward.

It is the 40% + costs most lawyers end up with that make these huge class action lawsuits nothing more than a lottery for the intelligent.

[Khirmint]

In a decision that could lead to cigarette-makers coughing up billions of dollars to pay for sick smokers' health care, the country's top court has ruled that British Columbia can sue the industry.

My understanding of it is that the money goes to the government to offset the costs of treating, not to individuals.

Also, since its the government going after the tobaccos companies, I don't think that class action lawsuits would be involved? The article does say that it could be as much as a decade before anything is seen from this, but settlement would likely be in the billions. It also references a similar settlement that already happened in the states for $245 billion.

I'd be interested to see just how much money is brought in by the taxes on cigarettes and how much of that actually goes to the treating of cigarette related disease.