It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Four cigarette makers that control nearly 90 percent of U.S. retail cigarette sales have until Feb. 19 to persuade the government not to go to the Supreme Court and ask the justices to step into a landmark 10-year-old racketeering lawsuit
The way the federal suit has played out contrasts sharply with state action against the tobacco industry.
The companies have agreed to pay $246 billion over 25 years to settle suits states brought to recover their costs of treating smoking-related illnesses in the Medicaid program, which serves the poor and disabled.
Originally posted by The Blind Eye
reply to post by Flighty
I stand corrected. As for name calling ADD and cheerleader are merely descriptors based on what you posted. If you want to take it personally that is your choice, but mind you i don't know adam about you... so that would be pretty silly now wouldn't it?
...and now i have to add "accusations of name calling".
As i said before our values/priorities collectively need to change... from profit before people to people before profits. Can anyone respond to this directly... instead of blurting out pro-capitalist crap?
Originally posted by The Blind Eye
reply to post by Nathan_Orin
'***hole' is not specific/descriptive... neither is 'jerk' which holds the same exact meaning, so i think it's safe to say such words would be deemed 'name calling'. "ADD" and "Cheerleader" on the other hand are specific and descriptive... therefore are descriptors.
Now why with three pages worth of posts to respond to, you choose to respond to one that is off topic. Kinda passive-aggressive don't you think?... again this is a description based on your post, i'm not name calling. Maybe instead of derailing the thread you could address this...
[edit on 4-2-2010 by The Blind Eye]
As i said before our values/priorities collectively need to change... from profit before people to people before profits.
If the government wants to milk the opportunity for all it worth, i'm all for it.
Originally posted by Nathan_Orin
when you used the terms 'ADD' and 'cheerleader' it came across as the equivalent of, "maybe if you'd focus and quit jumping up and down with your arms waving like that, you'd hear what i'm saying!"
(which kind of ties into that passive aggressiveness that you mentioned...)
i suppose that if you believe that our gov't is still for the people and by the people, then this ideology makes perfect sense. personally, i believe that pumping that money back into the gov't only perpetuates the 'profit before people' problem.
: being, marked by, or displaying behavior characterized by the expression of negative feelings, resentment, and aggression in an unassertive passive way (as through procrastination and stubbornness)
Currently our government is for the corporations by the corporations, which means that the majority of the politicians represent the corporations' interests not the peoples'. When there is a case like this, the gov has no other choice but to turn their priorities around. True our gov or as you put it our 'corporation', is an unreliable money handler but it's all we have to work with.
Never the less, i'd much rather see the money funneled towards a good cause, not a bad one. In this mammoth challenge to change our collective values/priorities around we have to start somewhere, and going after big tobacco is one step in the right direction.
our values/priorities collectively need to change... from profit before people to people before profits.
The big tobacco companies all use chemical phosphate fertilizer, which is high in radioactive metals, year after year on the same soil.
I just thought does that also include fluriode put in our tooth paste to be of radioactive substance? :/
"Radium wastes from filtration systems at phosphate fertilizer facilities are among the most radioactive types of naturally occurring radioactive material wastes...Uranium and all of its decay-rate products are found in phosphate rock, fluorosilicic acid (fluoride) and phosphate fertilizer."
"Removal of uranium as a product is no longer profitable and all of the extraction facilities have been dismantled. The uranium that remains in the phosphoric acid and fertilizer products is at a low enough level that it is safe for use." That's not reassuring. Chronic exposure to low levels of contamination can be as dangerous, or more so, than chronic high levels of exposure or acute occurrences.
Originally posted by soficrow
...Corporations have the rights of individual people...
U.S. Supreme Court: U.S. To Big Tobacco -- Fork Over That $280B
U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler didn't mince words in her ruling: "(T)he evidentiary picture must be viewed in its totality ... to fully appreciate how massive the case is against (the companies), how irresponsible their actions have been and how heedless they have been of the public welfare and the suffering caused by the cigarettes they sell."
She added the companies' business "survives, and profits, from selling a highly addictive product which causes diseases that lead to a staggering number of deaths per year, an immeasurable amount of human suffering and economic loss, and a profound burden on our national health care system."
She put the death toll from tobacco at 400,000 a year.
Kessler agreed to consider whether the companies should "disgorge" past profits earned from the racketeering behavior.