I don’t know how I feel about that either, on one hand, parents who smoke in the car with kids, knowing that they are causing damage of some degree to their children’s health ought to be charged. They are making selfish decisions that will impact their kids forever. But where should the line be drawn? Those same kids will have to deal with the same thing at their house or apartment. Should the state be allowed to charge parents for smoking on their own property? The real disgusting part is that the people who wrote up this law are just looking for money. First they gouge people with a high tax rate on an addictive substance and then hit them on the back end with laws like this. Sent from my iPhone using Bowhunting.com Forums
Exactly, they can't have it both ways. I'm sure there are the lobbyists for the kids as well, but kids don't pay the money. I think they protect the parent who pays them, more than the child that cannot. Insurance is a messed up thing, healthcare can't be free, but it can be cheaper. When I see some of my bills or EOB's come in I am amazed at what they would have billed me at what the "negotiated price" was. Free is not the answer, but maybe caps on certain services? I was just talking similar to my exa.ples tonight. My feet and ankles are going to chit. I go to a specialist Sep. 10th. If they reccomend PT I have to decline treatment because I know from my rotator cuff tear I cannot afford PT.
We buy Greenland, I might buy a piece of property there. Why not ? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Parents absolutely should not be able to smoke with their kids in the car Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Damn. The thought just came to me... My Dad smoked his whole life growing up in NY, including when we were in the car. Parents divorced and Dad ended up dying of (surprise) cancer (lung likely where it started). He shacked up with some honey his last few years, she ended up being the executor of his estate. Surprisingly, there was no money with in the estate... This from a man who pinched pennies, bought a house with acreage (after giving Mom the other in the divorce), worked till he died and was pissed he was forced he had to take distribution from retirement plans at age 70.5. I should've sued his estate for medical, emotional and some other ****, for having to endure the smoke. Likely would been able to at least get that *****, and her free loading adult is, out of the house.
I was referring to the health insurance lobby. You know, the ones who lobbied for ObamaCare b/c it included the individual mandate. Parents and the rest of us taxpayers paid for that. 2008 Health Insurance Lobbyist: We are against a government takeover of the healthcare system Cass Sunstein Obama: But we'll force everyone to buy your services at a premium rate; and then ration the coverage you actually have to provide to the policy holder later in life Health Insurance Lobbyist: We are for a government takeover of the healthcare system
Yea that doesn't make any sense to me either. And of that's the reasoning gonna be sending back alot more than a phone. Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
