On 9/8/11 2:22 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 13:32:41 -0700, wrote:

On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 15:55:10 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 10:42:54 -0700, wrote:

On Wed, 07 Sep 2011 12:44:07 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 7 Sep 2011 06:13:03 -0700 (PDT), North Star
wrote:

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Metro/1261953.html


That will just raise the cost of everything you buy from any store.
Insurance companies spread this risk to all of us. The Lawyer takes
his 33-50% and keeps it all himself.

Thus, someone shouldn't be compensated for her injuries?

We are not really sure what "injuries" she has. You seem to like to
assess degrees of blame. What is her degree of negligence for not
getting out of the way?

I agree! That's why we need courts and attorneys in the crucible of
jurisprudence.


I thought this would fall under the "cost of doing business" category.

That was my point. Everyone who buys anything from any store will be
paying for this. It simply gets passed along by the insurance
companies. That in turn shows up in the prices of products you buy
from the stores because they all have to buy that insurance.

They also have to pay for termite inspectors, lighting and heating,
and garbage removal services. So what??


You folks are cheering for this woman's windfall. Do you cheer for
termites too?


If the woman gets a windfall, it will be because of the negligence of
Wal-Mart, the marginal employees in its stores, and the lack of training
provided them. In a reasonable world, Wal-Mart would have been driven
out of business by its lack of ethics and predatory practices.


--
I'd much rather be a champion of the powerless than a lickspittle of the
powerful.