I know this isn't new news, but it continues to bother me. This makes no sense:
"Associate Attorney General Robert D. McCallum Jr. said the government's penalty reduction came after it concluded it could seek funds to cover cessation programs only for people who become addicted to tobacco in the near future.
That was the result of an appeals court ruling that said the government could not legally force the tobacco industry to pay $280 billion for allegedly ill-gotten past profits from tobacco sales."
Forgive me if I use a little common sense, but isn't the idea that legal punishment relates to what's been done as opposed to what will transpire in the future?
This Doonesbury strip distills the reduced settlement to its essence. Fuckers.