So didja hear? A unanimous Supreme Court ruling, announced on September 29th, will allow the province of B.C. to make claims for health costs of smoking and sue different corporations in the tobacco industry, upholding the constitutionality of B.C.'s Tobacco Damages and Health Care Costs Recovery Act. Now, Ontario health agencies have urged Premier McGuinty to adopt legislation allowing the Ontario Government to sue the tobacco industry for smoking-related health care costs too.
They claim that the direct health care costs in Ontario, and other provinces, due to the use of tobacco industry products are increasing and that to recover those costs, we should simply reclaim them from tobacco companies.
Now usually the words 'corportation' and 'tobacco' would set off a lengthy list of hate words from me. But at the risk of siding with the devil, I have to say that it's not fair.
It's the same reasoning behind the frivolous law suits people with obesity-related problems start against fast-food companies like McDonald's and Burger King. Their claim is that they are facing life-threatening health problems because of the type of food being sold at these and other big name chains.
Unless Ronald McDonald is stuffing Big Macs down your throat on a weekly basis there is no reason why you have any grounds to blame your problems on McDonalds. A half-wit knows that oily french fries, a Super sized Coke and and greasy red "meat" on a white bun (despite the lettuce and tomato slice) is not good for you in large quantities.
Hell, maybe you're a lesser half-wit and you don't realize this. But, when you start to pack on the pounds and you have difficulty getting a chair unstuck from your behind once you sit in it - something has got to click.
Same goes for the tobacco companies. You know they are bad for you. For crying out loud they have obviously-placed, repulsive and graphic pictures on the damn cigarette carton. It can only be more obvious if a little voice screamed the same information every time you flipped open the carton to pull out a lethal stick.
You see the public service ads and announcements. You're friends and family rag on you for the filthy habit. Yet when you inevitably get sick, you turn to the government to pick up the tab for all the expenses you've incurred for going to the doctor who he/she can now attempt to save your sorry self after you've diseased your body on purpose.
Face it. Whether it be Malboro or McDonald's, these are all legitimate businesses. Granted you may not like their products, but they are not manipulating you. They have a right to promote thier products and make money (regardless of how disgustingly high the amounts are). The information on any product you consume is out there. If you choose to not look for it, or ignore the information offered to you, why should others pay for it?
The doctor's who spend vast amounts of time trying to cure people who are now suffering due to their negligence could be helping people who need attention to ailments that they could not have prevented.
I do feel badly for the people who are sick - it's not that I don't have compassion for their conditions, but I hate to think of all they ways they could have prevented it.
It's the blame pushing that is so frustrating. I don't think I'd be that upset had the Province simply asked for cigarettes to be banned completely. But they know how much money tobacco companies provide in the form of taxes. And the uproar that would occur from people hooked to the habit. So instead they sue them for the expenses and blame them for the effects their products are having.
Same goes for the people suing the fast-food companies. They're looking for someone to blame, other than themselves, who will repay them for their awful condition. It would never occur to them that self control and a healthy lifestyle would have saved them from many of their ailments.
Banning tobacco altogether makes sense to me. It's an undoubtedly harmful substance with so much literature that proves it so. But the goverment would never do it. Sad, but true. Sure they're are a legitimate business, but they are selling harmful products and rather than just acknowledge the problem after it has been infested, why not stop it at it's root?
People just need to accept blame for their own actions and the consequences that are a result of them.
actually, i think the courts have made a correct decision... and here's why (in my humble opinion)... we live in a society where our health expenses are covered by our government... and indirectly by each of the citizens in this country... so the government has 3 choices to cover costs associated with smoke related illnesses... a)either raise the taxes for each individual regardless whether they smoke or not... 2) create a multi-tier health care system so that those that have smoke related illnesses pay for their own treatments... or iii) make the cigarette companies pay.
The first option would be out of the question as taxes are high enough and putting the burden on ALL individuals wouldn't be a very popular solution seeing that the majority of people in this country do not smoke... The second option would be a more viable solution than the first... but that in itself has far reaching implications where there is a fear of destroying the social health care system we so proudly boast around the world... The last option, which i think is probably the best, is doable because these cigarette companies make billions of dollars off the addictions of cigarettes... and cutting into a little of their profits wont' hurt them in the long run...
orrrr... maybe they should just ban cigarettes altogether... haha...
It's true that cutting into the profits made by cigarette companies won't hurt them because the amount of money involved, but as a business they are entitled to their profits. They pay taxes as all other business do and follow all other restrictions placed on them. The fact that their product causes addicitions has no weight.
They are a business like any other and to hold them responsible for the millions of people who have an illness now because an individual chose to consume their product can't be held against them. They offered the product, and whether it was purchased is completely in the consumer's hands. Now that the horrible habit has come back to bit them, it's like looking for a scapegoat.
Same reasoning could then be used with companies selling alcohol. Underage drinking, drinking and driving and numerous health risks are involved with alcoholism, but no one goes after these companies, who make just as much money as tobacco companies, to cover medical costs incurred because of the consequences that overconsumption of their product has caused.
Our health system is no longer one that we can effectively boast about. Many European countries have a far better and balanced system. So creating a multi-tier system should be an option. If you decide to take up smoking and become addicted to it, then the consequences that follow that habit are your own responsibility.
My own father smoked for 25+ years until he officially quit this past January. If God forbid some illness directly related to his smoking were to come up, he also can't expect to drain the province's resources for something that was completely preventable.
Some rights of this page's plain text stuffs are reserved for the author.
The template is generated via PsycHo, modified and optimized by BloggerO and is Licensed.
The first option would be out of the question as taxes are high enough and putting the burden on ALL individuals wouldn't be a very popular solution seeing that the majority of people in this country do not smoke... The second option would be a more viable solution than the first... but that in itself has far reaching implications where there is a fear of destroying the social health care system we so proudly boast around the world... The last option, which i think is probably the best, is doable because these cigarette companies make billions of dollars off the addictions of cigarettes... and cutting into a little of their profits wont' hurt them in the long run...
orrrr... maybe they should just ban cigarettes altogether... haha...
They are a business like any other and to hold them responsible for the millions of people who have an illness now because an individual chose to consume their product can't be held against them. They offered the product, and whether it was purchased is completely in the consumer's hands. Now that the horrible habit has come back to bit them, it's like looking for a scapegoat.
Same reasoning could then be used with companies selling alcohol. Underage drinking, drinking and driving and numerous health risks are involved with alcoholism, but no one goes after these companies, who make just as much money as tobacco companies, to cover medical costs incurred because of the consequences that overconsumption of their product has caused.
Our health system is no longer one that we can effectively boast about. Many European countries have a far better and balanced system. So creating a multi-tier system should be an option. If you decide to take up smoking and become addicted to it, then the consequences that follow that habit are your own responsibility.
My own father smoked for 25+ years until he officially quit this past January. If God forbid some illness directly related to his smoking were to come up, he also can't expect to drain the province's resources for something that was completely preventable.