Home | Community | Message Board


Mycohaus
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]
OfflineMrBump
Third prize is you're fired
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 4,254
Loc: Where Art Meets Crime
Last seen: 4 years, 2 months
Bush's Push For Tort Reform
    #3793908 - 02/17/05 05:17 PM (12 years, 12 days ago)

so, what do you think about Bush's plan to reform civil courts across the country?

i, for one, am against it.

over the past two decades, americans have been led to believe that our legal system is ripe with frivilous lawsuits and undeserving plaintiffs recieving multi-billion dollar settlements for spilling hot coffee on themselves. any reporter can always find a ridiculous lawsuit and twist it to make it look like the whole system is screwed up. while its easy to jump on the bandwagon calling for tort reform because the media only focuses on these types of frivolity, like THIS ONE , the media always fails to mention that the filing of civil lawsuits by consumers are down 9% since 1992. populations in TX and CA have increased over the last decade, but actual filings of lawsuits by individuals are down significantly in these states. furthermore, the average punitive damage award was a mere $27K. the fact is most reporters dont stick their noses into the civil courtroom (when compared to criminal trial coverage) unless the lawsuit is comically frivolous-- like the fat people suing McDonalds-- or when the plaintiff is attempting to sue for huge amounts of money.

we are also being assualted by a crafty PR campaign designed by the giant corporations from various industries including insurance and tobacco to believe the US is in a "litigaion crisis." These industries wish to limit the amount that consumers can recover from them when they wrong us. Tobacco companies spent $15 million in a single year to push the "lawsuit abuse" message while fighting off smokers' lawsuits. what most of us dont know (and Corporations dont want us to know) is that businesses in the US file 4 times as many lawsuits than US consumers do. lets see...281 mill. citizens, 7 million businesses. it would seem to me that its big business gumming up the legal system, not your average US citizen. i guess corps. only think america is too litigious when they are on the recieving end of a lawsuit. BTW, businesses and their attorneys were nearly 70% more likely than individual tort plaintiffs and their attorneys to be sanctioned by federal judges for filing frivolous claims or defenses. take a look at THIS ONE. in 2001, Cook County, Ill. (Chicago and suburbs) businesses went to the courthouse 5.8 times more often than trial attorneys representing individuals. The number of business lawsuits filed was 137,890 compared with just 26,938 by individuals. insurance companies want too see "class action lawsuit" reform to restrict the rights of consumers to sue...but in 2002, insurance co.'s filed 8000 suits in Cook County Ill., 35 times more than the number of class action suits filed by individuals in that year. most underhanded of all is corporations creating frontal groups across the country known as Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse-- whose members are actually businesses-- to trick the consumers into believing tort reform is needed.

republicans push for tort reform because it would be a blow to the funding of the democratic party and it would aid the giant corporations that fuel the GOP machine. trial lawyers are the 2nd biggest donor (catagory) to the Democratic party. republicans are attempting to title "the irresponsible plaintiff" as the new-millenium's answer the the "welfare queens" of the 1980's. coverage of these "welfare queens" led to massive cuts from gov. funding for the poor, and the stories were mostly fabricated. they wish to demonize lawyers in the same fashion to push through tort reform legislation that would scratch the backs of their biggest friends.
is tort reform neccessary?
You may choose only one
yes
no


Votes accepted from (02/17/05 02:00 PM) to (No end specified)
You must vote before you can view the results of this poll



--------------------
If it weren't for the bloody corpses, I wouldn't have any corpses at all.

There are two ways to get to the top of an oak tree: start climbing or sit on an acorn.

Are you a carrot, an egg, or a coffee bean?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineMrBump
Third prize is you're fired
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 4,254
Loc: Where Art Meets Crime
Last seen: 4 years, 2 months
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: MrBump]
    #3795282 - 02/17/05 10:24 PM (12 years, 12 days ago)



--------------------
If it weren't for the bloody corpses, I wouldn't have any corpses at all.

There are two ways to get to the top of an oak tree: start climbing or sit on an acorn.

Are you a carrot, an egg, or a coffee bean?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblemoog
Stranger

Registered: 02/15/05
Posts: 1,296
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: MrBump]
    #3795662 - 02/17/05 11:14 PM (12 years, 12 days ago)

Civil lawsuits are really funny to me. I don't see how they can even be legal. It's basically someone trying to suck money from someone else for something they're at least partially responsible for. Take some responsibility for your own choices and actions, I say.

In this case, any reform is a good idea.


Edited by moog (02/17/05 11:20 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleblacksabbathrulz
 User Gallery
Registered: 05/22/02
Posts: 2,511
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: MrBump]
    #3795681 - 02/17/05 11:16 PM (12 years, 12 days ago)

Yeah, when you have companies losing 12 billion in a lawsuit over a drug that harmed 6 ppl.....that's not problematic. I support tort reform more than any other issue period. The cost of health insurance and medicine is drastically increased by the cost of these frivolous lawsuits.


--------------------
.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblez@z.com
Libertarian
Registered: 10/13/02
Posts: 2,876
Loc: ATL
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: blacksabbathrulz]
    #3795709 - 02/17/05 11:20 PM (12 years, 12 days ago)

Quote:

blacksabbathrulz said:
Yeah, when you have companies losing 12 billion in a lawsuit over a drug that harmed 6 ppl.....that's not problematic. I support tort reform more than any other issue period. The cost of health insurance and medicine is drastically increased by the cost of these frivolous lawsuits.



Exactly. I don't think Bush's plan is the answer though. I don't see anything in the Constitution that allows the federal government to take control of these lawsuits. I also don't think that will slow the lawsuits down that much, and it is very expensive to defend against these suits. I think we need a loser pays system. That would drastically cut down on the frivolous lawsuits.


--------------------
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineMrBump
Third prize is you're fired
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 4,254
Loc: Where Art Meets Crime
Last seen: 4 years, 2 months
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: blacksabbathrulz]
    #3795785 - 02/17/05 11:36 PM (12 years, 12 days ago)

Quote:

blacksabbathrulz said:
Yeah, when you have companies losing 12 billion in a lawsuit over a drug that harmed 6 ppl.....that's not problematic. I support tort reform more than any other issue period. The cost of health insurance and medicine is drastically increased by the cost of these frivolous lawsuits.




Who inflates medicine prices? the drug companies do.

i'll support this class action suit against drug companies.

NY state sues Glaxo for suppressing critical studies showing Paxil's negative side effects in children.
Att. Gen. Spitzer alleges that the company suppressed the other studies' negative results, including findings that suggested a possible increased risk of suicide in children and adolescents who used the drug.

Do drug co.'s care about saving lives or the bottom line?

we should quit using the court system as a scapegoat for the medical shortcomings and inflated prices set by the pharm. industry.


--------------------
If it weren't for the bloody corpses, I wouldn't have any corpses at all.

There are two ways to get to the top of an oak tree: start climbing or sit on an acorn.

Are you a carrot, an egg, or a coffee bean?


Edited by MrBump (02/17/05 11:41 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineMrBump
Third prize is you're fired
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 4,254
Loc: Where Art Meets Crime
Last seen: 4 years, 2 months
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: moog]
    #3795827 - 02/17/05 11:46 PM (12 years, 12 days ago)

Quote:

moog said:
Civil lawsuits are really funny to me. I don't see how they can even be legal. It's basically someone trying to suck money from someone else for something they're at least partially responsible for. Take some responsibility for your own choices and actions, I say.

In this case, any reform is a good idea.




so, you are responsible for taking a prescription drug for,say...anxeity, that ends up destroying your liver, or your heart, or sinks you into a deeper depression. i guess you should be responsible for understanding that some drugs might have unknown dangerous side-effects.

i guess everybody better get cracking, medical school applications are'nt accepted after Feb. 28th.


--------------------
If it weren't for the bloody corpses, I wouldn't have any corpses at all.

There are two ways to get to the top of an oak tree: start climbing or sit on an acorn.

Are you a carrot, an egg, or a coffee bean?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblemoog
Stranger

Registered: 02/15/05
Posts: 1,296
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: MrBump]
    #3795879 - 02/17/05 11:56 PM (12 years, 12 days ago)

You take the pill by your own will, so you accept the consequences that come with that. What if you have a psychotic break from taking LSD? That would be an unforeseen side effect. Who're you going to sue then? Your dealer? Or maybe Albert Hoffman.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineMrBump
Third prize is you're fired
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 4,254
Loc: Where Art Meets Crime
Last seen: 4 years, 2 months
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: moog]
    #3795951 - 02/18/05 12:06 AM (12 years, 12 days ago)

BIG difference there:
1. LSD is illegal
2. its not meant to cure anything, it has no medical value.

ive never heard of Miller being sued b/c an individual suffered alcohol-poisoning.
if someone did, the suit would be dismissed before the ink on the complaint dried.


--------------------
If it weren't for the bloody corpses, I wouldn't have any corpses at all.

There are two ways to get to the top of an oak tree: start climbing or sit on an acorn.

Are you a carrot, an egg, or a coffee bean?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineFrankieJustTrypt
and fell

Registered: 01/27/04
Posts: 537
Loc: MI
Last seen: 2 years, 7 months
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: MrBump]
    #3796038 - 02/18/05 12:25 AM (12 years, 12 days ago)

Any legislation from the federal government pertaining to the state and local governments will always have the primary/secondary goal of usurping more power. What we need, I feel, is stronger state and local governments and a weaker federal one.


--------------------
If you want a free lunch, you need to learn how to eat good advice.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleblacksabbathrulz
 User Gallery
Registered: 05/22/02
Posts: 2,511
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: MrBump]
    #3796525 - 02/18/05 01:51 AM (12 years, 11 days ago)

Quote:

thecornking said:
Quote:

moog said:
Civil lawsuits are really funny to me. I don't see how they can even be legal. It's basically someone trying to suck money from someone else for something they're at least partially responsible for. Take some responsibility for your own choices and actions, I say.

In this case, any reform is a good idea.




so, you are responsible for taking a prescription drug for,say...anxeity, that ends up destroying your liver, or your heart, or sinks you into a deeper depression. i guess you should be responsible for understanding that some drugs might have unknown dangerous side-effects.

i guess everybody better get cracking, medical school applications are'nt accepted after Feb. 28th.




You assume a risk when you take any medication. I say if people lose their eye sight etc. well then perhaps they shouldn't have taken the drug. There isn't a responsibility for these drugs to exist in the first place. When a man gets 250 million dollars for simply being afraid of being injured by a drug, where 6/6,000,000 ppl developed PPH as a result, well its fucking bullshit. You can try to convince me until your face is blue that drug companies are evil facist corporations, but I'll just ignore the rhetoric as I've heard it all before.


--------------------
.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleblacksabbathrulz
 User Gallery
Registered: 05/22/02
Posts: 2,511
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: blacksabbathrulz]
    #3796539 - 02/18/05 01:54 AM (12 years, 11 days ago)

Oh, and please explain to me how when a company like Wyeth-Ayerst has to pay out 22 BILLION dollars as a result of the harmless drug known as fen-phen, how exactly are they supposed to recoup their expenses in order to keep producing medicines? Hmmmm..... this is a brainbuster.........


--------------------
.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: MrBump]
    #3796990 - 02/18/05 04:30 AM (12 years, 11 days ago)

It's a done deal. It passed the House with a very comfortable majority, meaning plenty of Democrats voted for it as well.



Phred


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 1 month, 22 days
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: MrBump]
    #3797192 - 02/18/05 06:27 AM (12 years, 11 days ago)

I just finished as an expert witness for the defense in a civil lawsuit against a local business. The plaintifs in the case are from the States and are suing for 14 million dollars. I can't discuss the case, but it boils down to something like: "We had something bad happen to us while on vacation and since you are the airline that flew us to the carribean, and since you have the deepest pockets, we are going to sue you."

I donno who thinks the system isn't broken, but from my limited experience in the court system it sure seems broken to me.

> the average punitive damage award was a mere $27K.

How many cases are settled out of court? Almost all of them. The only time a case goes forward to trial is if the defense feels they can easily win.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblemoog
Stranger

Registered: 02/15/05
Posts: 1,296
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: MrBump]
    #3797528 - 02/18/05 10:05 AM (12 years, 11 days ago)

That's exactly my point bro. You can sue for some things but not others. The only difference between Celebrex and LSD is that one's legally prescribed and one isn't. WHY you use a drug is beside the point. The point is, if you choose to use it, then you have to live with the consequences. Same goes for the restaurant you chose to eat at, the airline you chose to fly, the car you chose to drive, et cetera.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineJesusChrist
Son Of God
Registered: 02/19/04
Posts: 1,459
Last seen: 4 years, 5 months
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: moog]
    #3797568 - 02/18/05 10:29 AM (12 years, 11 days ago)

I am all for making companies "pay" for their mistakes, but they usually just pay the lawyers and not the victims. Our legal system is fucked in my opinion.

We had lawyers make billions on the tobacco settlement. It was a huge cash grab. I would rather have lower costs to medical care and take my chances in the end.


--------------------
Tastes just like chicken


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineBaby_Hitler
Errorist
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 22,840
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 4 months, 24 days
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: Seuss]
    #3797675 - 02/18/05 11:23 AM (12 years, 11 days ago)

We need a system where victims get paid, and lawyers get paid some.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineMrBump
Third prize is you're fired
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 4,254
Loc: Where Art Meets Crime
Last seen: 4 years, 2 months
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: moog]
    #3799697 - 02/18/05 07:21 PM (12 years, 11 days ago)

Quote:

moog said:
That's exactly my point bro. You can sue for some things but not others. The only difference between Celebrex and LSD is that one's legally prescribed and one isn't. WHY you use a drug is beside the point. The point is, if you choose to use it, then you have to live with the consequences. Same goes for the restaurant you chose to eat at, the airline you chose to fly, the car you chose to drive, et cetera.




actually i was wrong about not being able to sue drug dealer, so i'll eat some crow:

The Drug Dealer Liability Act

some quotes from this long article:

Thus, if the specific individual who distributed drugs to the child could be identified, the parent could bring an action against that individual.
In reality, however, few such actions are ever brought under existing law. For example, no one has brought a reported case under the Washington statute, although it was passed in 1986.

At best only the retail level dealers could be reached. Thus, the potential pool of defendants for an individual plaintiff would be too small to make a civil lawsuit economically feasible.

Re: use of civil suit as a deterent when compared to criminal action: Those who have something to lose are unlikely to risk losing it. For example, within two years after the Southern Pacific Transportation (Railway) Company initiated a urinalysis testing program, positive drug tests dropped from 22.9% to 5.3%.16 Apparently, the threat of job loss caused a significant number of employees to stop using drugs. This is an example of an economic consequence that had an impact even though criminal sanctions had not.

Finally, virtually no one actively seeks out an illegal drug the first time. Often some other person first offers the drug to the user. It has been suggested that the average person who ultimately uses drugs has rejected drugs several times before they began drug use. In keeping with traditional notions of comparative responsibility, the dealer who introduces the drug is surely more responsible than the person who first tries it. I wonder how true this is for most people....but this is how drug use began for me.

I have no sympathy for those who deal drugs and that could possible get sued over a customer who OD's while using the drug. there is an inferred intent to harm in the sale of drugs like heroin and coke b/c the dealer obviosly knows the dangers of these drugs to cause harm to the user. Dealers are in the drug trade solely to make a large profit off of sales to users, and they hope these users become addicts to keep a strong sales base.But there is definetely contributory negligence involved with the user, who knows as well the dangers of using illiegal drugs too, tho.
but like the first quote states, its not likely to bring a suit anyways so i dont mind that this Act exists.


--------------------
If it weren't for the bloody corpses, I wouldn't have any corpses at all.

There are two ways to get to the top of an oak tree: start climbing or sit on an acorn.

Are you a carrot, an egg, or a coffee bean?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineMrBump
Third prize is you're fired
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 4,254
Loc: Where Art Meets Crime
Last seen: 4 years, 2 months
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: moog]
    #3799757 - 02/18/05 07:29 PM (12 years, 11 days ago)

Quote:

moog said:
That's exactly my point bro. You can sue for some things but not others. The only difference between Celebrex and LSD is that one's legally prescribed and one isn't. WHY you use a drug is beside the point.






Why you choose to use a drug is beside the point? The point is, if you choose to use it, then you have to live with the consequences?

thats strange logic, what if you need a prescription drug like a blood-pressure reducer to stay alive? isnt staying alive the point of taking the prescribed medication?
i think the idea of freedom of choice is thrown out when the choice is to take the prescribed, regulated drug vs. oh....dying of a heart-attack.

Same goes for the restaurant you chose to eat at, the airline you chose to fly, the car you chose to drive, et cetera.

so i guess its my fault if i go to a sizzlers and get salmonela poisoning b/c some cook let raw chicken juices drip on my fruit salad, huh?

i agree that people in america dont take nearly the amount of responsibility for their actions as they should, but you are an extremist with your views on negligent actions.


--------------------
If it weren't for the bloody corpses, I wouldn't have any corpses at all.

There are two ways to get to the top of an oak tree: start climbing or sit on an acorn.

Are you a carrot, an egg, or a coffee bean?


Edited by MrBump (02/18/05 08:21 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineMrBump
Third prize is you're fired
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/01/02
Posts: 4,254
Loc: Where Art Meets Crime
Last seen: 4 years, 2 months
Re: Bush's Push For Tort Reform [Re: blacksabbathrulz]
    #3799816 - 02/18/05 07:46 PM (12 years, 11 days ago)

You assume a risk when you take any medication. I say if people lose their eye sight etc. well then perhaps they shouldn't have taken the drug. There isn't a responsibility for these drugs to exist in the first place. When a man gets 250 million dollars for simply being afraid of being injured by a drug, where 6/6,000,000 ppl developed PPH as a result, well its fucking bullshit. You can try to convince me until your face is blue that drug companies are evil facist corporations, but I'll just ignore the rhetoric as I've heard it all before.

you are right, there isnt a responsibility for any company to simply exist, thats totally obvious. that would be a dumb reason to start up a company. drug companies are in business to MAKE MONEY and they make a lot of it. they are responsible for the quality of the products they produce, to their customers, and to their shareholders and board of directors....but apparently not in that order.

and in regards to the drug company that paid out 22 billion "how are they supposed to recoup their loses?"

the drug company didnt pay the 22 billion, who ever insured the drug compnay paid the 22 billion. thats the risk insurance companies take when they insure an entity.
yes, yes, but the premiums go up and the drug companies pass the buck down to the consumers by raising prices... :blah: just another way they skirt responsibilities for their actions IMO. i will never let  global multi-corps play the victim  :crymeariver:

thecornking, an average citizen, is supposed to turn on another average citizen b/c they are injured by a corporation and actually desire to fight back. i dont think so.


--------------------
If it weren't for the bloody corpses, I wouldn't have any corpses at all.

There are two ways to get to the top of an oak tree: start climbing or sit on an acorn.

Are you a carrot, an egg, or a coffee bean?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Lets get it on: Bush and SS reform.
( 1 2 all )
Catalysis 2,374 24 02/04/05 07:52 AM
by zappaisgod
* bush pushes through patriot 2 while we look that way! jiva 1,137 13 12/26/03 04:39 PM
by Anonymous
* Bush Pushes Gay Marriage Ban
( 1 2 all )
DiploidM 2,402 36 06/05/06 06:03 PM
by Redstorm
* Bush Pushes for Surveillance Law elbisivni 927 9 08/04/07 01:03 PM
by Luddite
* Ashcroft (Bush Admin) seeks DEA on Medical Marijuana Center Libertarian 278 0 09/04/04 05:45 PM
by Libertarian
* Compared to George Bush, Clinton was Conservative
( 1 2 all )
Skeptikos 3,446 31 01/20/06 02:11 AM
by Falcon91Wolvrn03
* Health Care Reform?
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 1,300 21 08/25/03 11:00 AM
by Anonymous
* Is Bush a PROGRESSIVE? lonestar2004 829 14 11/18/04 10:58 PM
by lonestar2004

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Prisoner#1, Enlil
1,301 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 2 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Lil Shop Of Spores
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2017 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.099 seconds spending 0.018 seconds on 21 queries.