VABills Posted November 29, 2004 Author Share Posted November 29, 2004 Oh, I am too (in regards to your second paragraph), just arguing the point. 33% is way too high, too much incentive to chase the ambulence. Any decision involves weighing risks v. benefits. If the benefit was only 5%-10%, I suspect the lawyer would have to adjust his 'risk' tolerance and only take cases that appeared to be valid. 138217[/snapback] KD, good point. I had never thought of limiting from a lawyer standpoint. I also don't believe I have seen that recommended elsewhere, contrary to whatever any Dexters around here say. That maybe a real good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 29, 2004 Share Posted November 29, 2004 I also don't believe I have seen that recommended elsewhere, contrary to whatever any Dexters around here say. 138551[/snapback] :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: You know I said it first, you bastard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted November 29, 2004 Author Share Posted November 29, 2004 :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: You know I said it first, you bastard. 138563[/snapback] Prove it. Do a search and show me. If you can, then you are a liar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 Jumping in willy nilly. But, to me the bigger issue is not so much the individual awards, but the lax standards that judges use to allow class action cases to go forward. Those are the babies that buy the Aspen villas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimshiz Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 I don't know the answers. What I do know is that when a janitor who is 50 years old, uneducated making 30K a year, loses his life due to an honest mistake. The family should not be awarded tens or hundreds of millions in a lawsuit. Figure out what his "salary" and COL for the remaining 30 years of expected work years were, "some" pain and suffering and move on. In this case 1.5 million would be the cap, IMHO. The probably is this is realistic but everyone wants the BIG payday, rather then understanding anyone can make a mistake. You make them pay, but without corrupting the system, healthcare and insurance companies to do it. 137832[/snapback] I don't know the answers either, but the scenario you proposed is pretty disgusting. What Ford did to determine that lawsuits would cost less than fixing their product is disgusting too. When you make a moral judgment, you CAN'T let monetary value cloud the decision of right and wrong. On the other hand, I would hope that most people would agree that someone stupid enough to put hot coffee between their legs got what they deserved and they certainly did not deserve a $ amount equal to what McDonald's made in a day. And I also kind of agree that the first people to be successful against someone who has injured many should not be awarded more money than a human possibly needs. The first Menendez jury and the OJ criminal jury were two sets of completely stupid people. But, that does not mean the solution is to get rid of the jury system. At the same time, we should not be "inventing" federal laws so that people who get off on technicalities can be brought up again on stupid federal laws - this is in essense double jeapordy and should not be allowed. I also don't think it is right that the lawyers who were finally successful against the tobacco companies got so much money and the people who were actually injured did not get what they deserved. But, I am also against price caps. There is NO silver bullet here. There are lots of problems. But, we must be careful about how we go about solving the problem. We really have to get at what the "root cause" is. Sometimes it is not obvious. If GWB recommends "caps", he will be labelled as against the "little guy". If he recommends fee structures, he will be labelled as "against the market system". The bottom line is that there are problems, not a crisis, and the problems can be fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snorom Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 but low enough to help control or lower health care costs. 137325[/snapback] HMO's made billions last year, I don't think writng laws curbing frivoulous lawsuits are really the problem with health costs. Just more about increasing profits. In a country where CEO's, VP's and other persons in high positions continually make millions of dollars, and write themselves million dollar bonus checks, it would be more refreshing to see the wages of these higher up individual's lowered to a more reasonable level as a way of lowering health costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 HMO's made billions last year, I don't think writng laws curbing frivoulous lawsuits are really the problem with health costs. Just more about increasing profits. In a country where CEO's, VP's and other persons in high positions continually make millions of dollars, and write themselves million dollar bonus checks, it would be more refreshing to see the wages of these higher up individual's lowered to a more reasonable level as a way of lowering health costs. 139015[/snapback] Exactly. I said, next they will try and convince people that bankruptcies lead to higher interest rates. What did the credit card industry make in profits last year... 40 billion? How much did individuals claim in bankruptcies... 2 billion? That's what?... 38 billion dollars in profit? Correct me if my figures are wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 That's what?... 38 billion dollars in profit? Correct me if my figures are wrong. 139023[/snapback] Stick to your day job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 Stick to your day job. 139098[/snapback] The "money man" speaks... Thanks, I'll take the advice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 30, 2004 Share Posted November 30, 2004 The "money man" speaks... Thanks, I'll take the advice... 139481[/snapback] I'm sorry, I couldn't understand you. The overwhelming stench of trench water is too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 I'm sorry, I couldn't understand you. The overwhelming stench of trench water is too much. 139749[/snapback] What? Swimming in the Knik Arm of the Cook Inlet again? Gotta stay out of there Darin... Those icebergs will get you! Actually... the place freezes pretty solid now... Zebra mussels from our upper pool (Lake Michigan) have been doing a great job cleaning the joint up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 What? Swimming in the Knik Arm of the Cook Inlet again? Gotta stay out of there Darin... Those icebergs will get you! Actually... the place freezes pretty solid now... Zebra mussels from our upper pool (Lake Michigan) have been doing a great job cleaning the joint up. 141333[/snapback] Considering Cook Inlet has the 2nd largest tide swing on the planet, it does a pretty nice job of cleaning itself up. I was referring to your apparent penchent for drinking the water around there. It affects you very overtly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 I was referring to your apparent penchent for drinking the water around there. It affects you very overtly. 141362[/snapback] Oh, I got it off right off the bat... Hence my comment. Like I said before, it is sure better to be on the top of the food chain. Just think, by the time it (water from Lake Michigan (Chicago city at work), home is well water (Lake Superior water table)) reaches New Orleans, it has PASSED through three people. So, I guess all those people throughout the Mississippi river valley are affected even more overtly? I think we are in sad shape here in mid-America? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Ohh... I forgot to ask Darin, you said Cook was the second... What is the first? Would that be Inchon, Korea? ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Ohh... I forgot to ask Darin, you said Cook was the second... What is the first? Would that be Inchon, Korea? ??? 141661[/snapback] Isn't it the Bay of Fundy? Not only 50 foot tides...but a ridiculously shallow slope to the coast, so that the waterfront actually moves miles at a time with the tides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Ohh... I forgot to ask Darin, you said Cook was the second... What is the first? Would that be Inchon, Korea? ??? 141661[/snapback] I don't know. Wherever it is, I don't live there. I think Tom's right, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 1, 2004 Share Posted December 1, 2004 Isn't it the Bay of Fundy? Not only 50 foot tides...but a ridiculously shallow slope to the coast, so that the waterfront actually moves miles at a time with the tides. 141681[/snapback] I was in Portsmouth, NH this summer and took a harbor tour, the guy claimed that it had the biggest on the east coast of the US??? I took note of the light out in the harbor... They said when the perfecr storm of '91 (not sure the exact year)... The surge broke over the 60' granite structure... It had to be wild to see! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 I was in Portsmouth, NH this summer and took a harbor tour, the guy claimed that it had the biggest on the east coast of the US??? 141791[/snapback] Maybe. Probably not. Because of the way the Bay of Fundy and Gulf of Maine are formed geologically, the northeast coast of the US tends to have relatively high tides...but I would strongly suspect that there's costal areas in Maine that have higher tides than Portsmouth NH. Plus...I've been to the NH shore. The tides aren't all THAT high. Portsmouth harbor would tend to funnel the flow and make it higher, but there's still only so much water in the tidal flow to begin with. And I just checked the tide forecasts for the NH/ME coast. The highest tide in the Portsmouth area over the next three days is a good foot lower than in York Harbor ME. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Maybe. Probably not. Because of the way the Bay of Fundy and Gulf of Maine are formed geologically, the northeast coast of the US tends to have relatively high tides...but I would strongly suspect that there's costal areas in Maine that have higher tides than Portsmouth NH. Plus...I've been to the NH shore. The tides aren't all THAT high. Portsmouth harbor would tend to funnel the flow and make it higher, but there's still only so much water in the tidal flow to begin with. And I just checked the tide forecasts for the NH/ME coast. The highest tide in the Portsmouth area over the next three days is a good foot lower than in York Harbor ME. 142110[/snapback] That's what I thought... It sound kinda valid because of the long estuary type environment that the Piscataqua creates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts