On 08/09/2011 5:50 PM, Drifter wrote:
On 9/8/2011 7:43 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:12:36 -0700, wrote:

You seriously believe that all costs are passed along to the consumer?
All costs? Feel free to try and defend that statement.

Yes I do. Unless the company wants to lose money and nobody wants to
do that. Anything as inelastic as insurance premiums gets spread
universally so all prices just go up.

It's either that or pay the stockholders less. Which would you choose if
you were COTB.

Stock holders get their slice or no jobs/invest.

The Obama way, everyone on welfare.
--
First rule of holes: If your in one, don't keep digging.
So in the hole, why do we insanely want more debt?

"X ` Man" wrote in message ...

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.


-------------------------------------------------------
Not really. The original case of letting a kid fall out of the grocery cart
because of no seat belt were my neighbors in the mid 50's. The let the kid
fall out of the Safeway Stores grocery cart. They got $50k plus a college
fund for the kid. Was not Safeway's fault they let the kid fall out. Cars
did not even have seat belts. Started a flood of windfall suits over the
years.

On 9/9/2011 11:44 AM, Califbill wrote:
"X ` Man" wrote in message ...

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.



Krause thinks the gubmint is obligated by the Constitution to protect
him from himself and others.

On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 14:08:17 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 22:11:06 -0700, wrote:

On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 22:42:00 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 19:13:56 -0700, wrote:

On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 20:31:59 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 16:23:19 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 08/09/2011 11:12 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 02:21:07 -0400, wrote:


You seriously believe that all costs are passed along to the consumer?
All costs? Feel free to try and defend that statement.

As I actually said, the "insurance claims are.. a tiny piece of the
pie."

Ultimately yep, all costs will be passed on to the consumer. Take oil,
go ahead, slap a $90/barrel tax on oil and watch the pump prices double
or more.

A classic example was the massive judgement against the cigarette
companies. Shortly after that Altria posted record profits.

I doubt there's much causation between the two. Feel free to provide
some facts that support this causation.

They certainly passed all the costs on to the customer, plus a huge
profit.

The cost being lung cancer. Of course, they don't need to be
regulated, right? The consumer should be able to figure it out without
any help from the gov't. Why they can just stop, and if they can't,
they must be weak-minded and deserve to get sick. - this is the
mantra of the right, including Ron (non-St.) Paul.

People who smoke know it is dangerous, everyone has known that for 40
years. They are hooked on the drug and they keep doing it. You can say
the same thing about a lot of drugs, legal and illegal.
It is really none of our business.

If you are worried about the cost of Medicare you should like smokers.
A lot of them will die before they ever even get to 65.
Most avoid going to the doctor and they die fairly cheaply compared to
a "healthy" person who lives to 85, getting artificial hips, organ
transplants, cataract operations and tons of expensive drugs.

It sounds cruel but it is the choice they made.

My non-smoking grandfather lived to 100 and cost Medicare a bundle. My
smoking parents both died young and didn't have any significant
medical bills at all. My smoking sister is pretty much on her death
bed and still not on medicare. (Dec 01, 11 based on her husband's age)

What about kids? Are they supposed to understand those dangers? How
old do they have to be? Tobacco companies have and continue to promote
smoking to kids. What about second hand smoke?

But, that's ok in a society (oh wait, it wouldn't be a society) that
ignores public health.

On Fri, 9 Sep 2011 07:46:01 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 16:23:19 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 08/09/2011 11:12 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 02:21:07 -0400, wrote:


You seriously believe that all costs are passed along to the consumer?
All costs? Feel free to try and defend that statement.

As I actually said, the "insurance claims are.. a tiny piece of the
pie."

Ultimately yep, all costs will be passed on to the consumer. Take oil,
go ahead, slap a $90/barrel tax on oil and watch the pump prices double
or more.

A classic example was the massive judgement against the cigarette
companies. Shortly after that Altria posted record profits.

It is amazinig what business can do when they do not have an unknown
hanging over their head.


What unknown? Typical bull**** comment with no substance.

On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:20:56 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 08/09/2011 5:50 PM, Drifter wrote:
On 9/8/2011 7:43 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:12:36 -0700, wrote:

You seriously believe that all costs are passed along to the consumer?
All costs? Feel free to try and defend that statement.

Yes I do. Unless the company wants to lose money and nobody wants to
do that. Anything as inelastic as insurance premiums gets spread
universally so all prices just go up.

It's either that or pay the stockholders less. Which would you choose if
you were COTB.

Stock holders get their slice or no jobs/invest.

The Obama way, everyone on welfare.

You really have a hard-on for him don't you. Everything is about
Obama. How about some personal responsibility on your part? Oh wait,
you're an idiot.

On 09/09/2011 12:34 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:20:56 -0600,
wrote:

On 08/09/2011 5:50 PM, Drifter wrote:
On 9/8/2011 7:43 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:12:36 -0700, wrote:

You seriously believe that all costs are passed along to the consumer?
All costs? Feel free to try and defend that statement.

Yes I do. Unless the company wants to lose money and nobody wants to
do that. Anything as inelastic as insurance premiums gets spread
universally so all prices just go up.

It's either that or pay the stockholders less. Which would you choose if
you were COTB.

Stock holders get their slice or no jobs/invest.

The Obama way, everyone on welfare.

You really have a hard-on for him don't you. Everything is about
Obama. How about some personal responsibility on your part? Oh wait,
you're an idiot.

Obama has **** to do with personal responsibility. I have personal
responsibility, I don't depend on government like a leach like you.

Polly fleabagger want a cracker?

--
First rule of holes: If your in one, don't keep digging.
So in the hole, why do we insanely want more debt?

On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 14:19:42 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 09/09/2011 12:34 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:20:56 -0600,
wrote:

On 08/09/2011 5:50 PM, Drifter wrote:
On 9/8/2011 7:43 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:12:36 -0700, wrote:

You seriously believe that all costs are passed along to the consumer?
All costs? Feel free to try and defend that statement.

Yes I do. Unless the company wants to lose money and nobody wants to
do that. Anything as inelastic as insurance premiums gets spread
universally so all prices just go up.

It's either that or pay the stockholders less. Which would you choose if
you were COTB.

Stock holders get their slice or no jobs/invest.

The Obama way, everyone on welfare.

You really have a hard-on for him don't you. Everything is about
Obama. How about some personal responsibility on your part? Oh wait,
you're an idiot.

Obama has **** to do with personal responsibility. I have personal
responsibility, I don't depend on government like a leach like you.

Polly fleabagger want a cracker?

Give us a break. You've got your greasy little hand out all the time.
I'm sure the Canadian gov't is pretty sick of you by now. Move to
Somalia like you promised.

On 9/9/2011 4:19 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 09/09/2011 12:34 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 09:20:56 -0600,
wrote:

On 08/09/2011 5:50 PM, Drifter wrote:
On 9/8/2011 7:43 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:12:36 -0700, wrote:

You seriously believe that all costs are passed along to the
consumer?
All costs? Feel free to try and defend that statement.

Yes I do. Unless the company wants to lose money and nobody wants to
do that. Anything as inelastic as insurance premiums gets spread
universally so all prices just go up.

It's either that or pay the stockholders less. Which would you
choose if
you were COTB.

Stock holders get their slice or no jobs/invest.

The Obama way, everyone on welfare.

You really have a hard-on for him don't you. Everything is about
Obama. How about some personal responsibility on your part? Oh wait,
you're an idiot.

Obama has **** to do with personal responsibility. I have personal
responsibility, I don't depend on government like a leach like you.

Polly fleabagger want a cracker?


Are you intentionally attracting flies like De Plume?

On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 21:02:33 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 11:32:59 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 14:08:17 -0400, wrote:

My non-smoking grandfather lived to 100 and cost Medicare a bundle. My
smoking parents both died young and didn't have any significant
medical bills at all. My smoking sister is pretty much on her death
bed and still not on medicare. (Dec 01, 11 based on her husband's age)

What about kids? Are they supposed to understand those dangers? How
old do they have to be? Tobacco companies have and continue to promote
smoking to kids. What about second hand smoke?

The law says they have to be 18, they should understand the danger by
then if they will ever learn.

Yes, the law says. And, the tobacco companies have routinely ignored
it.

Second hand smoke is mostly a nuisance, not a health hazard.
If you have 100 smokers in a small room you might have a potential
hazard but a whiff of smoke on a park bench never hurt anyone.

Wow. You should send your results to the Mayo Clinic. I'm sure they'd
be interested in reviewing them.

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/sec...-smoke/CC00023