State of the Union Address

[opinterph]

Was tort reform mentioned in the state of the union speech?

No. Tort reform was not mentioned in the State of the Union Address.

 

[construct]

No. Tort reform was not mentioned in the State of the Union Address.

Good. Then I can back away quietly from this little fracas.

 

[Kulindahr]

Was tort reform mentioned in the state of the union speech? Even if it was, I'm agin' it.

Opposing tort reform is akin to approving of pillage and plunder: the system as it is, is a license to lawyers to get wealthy at the expense of the poor, to besiege and plunder the innocent.

 

[01solara]

Opposing tort reform is akin to approving of pillage and plunder: the system as it is, is a license to lawyers to get wealthy at the expense of the poor, to besiege and plunder the innocent.

This is exactly the way John Edwards got rich.

He was slimy then and is a slimy cheat now. He didn't just cheat on his wife he put the mistress on the payroll and had a child with her. He totally left her in the dark to go out and defend his sorry ass while she had cancer. He is pathetic. He should be investigated and prosecuted if there were any campaign spending infractions.

The lawyers get a huge cut of anything they win on top of it. Many times the lawyers get more than the person that actually won the judgment.

 

[Kulindahr]

This is exactly the way John Edwards got rich.

He was slimy then and is a slimy cheat now. He didn't just cheat on his wife he put the mistress on the payroll and had a child with her. He totally left her in the dark to go out and defend his sorry ass while she had cancer. He is pathetic. He should be investigated and prosecuted if there were any campaign spending infractions.

The lawyers get a huge cut of anything they win on top of it. Many times the lawyers get more than the person that actually won the judgment.

I was part of a class action settlement a few years back. I got about twelve bucks. Each attorney "representing" us all got about a million times that.

 

[grantt]

^I was involved in an estate settlement with a court appointed attorney and the family did not make anything compared to the attorney and his cronies that sold off the estate. Disgusting!

 

[Kulindahr]

^I was involved in an estate settlement with a court appointed attorney and the family did not make anything compared to the attorney and his cronies that sold off the estate. Disgusting!

There's a piece of tort reform I saw go down in flames once, despite its common sense: quite often, lawyers get their cut before the expenses of a case are taken care of. That's probably what happened to the family: the lawyers took their cut, then paid the expenses of handling the estate, leaving very little for the heirs.

Vile.

 

[Kulindahr]

Hey, hyperbole and strong rhetoric can be made from any stance.

Proponents of tort reform is akin to inviting doctors to neglect every patient.

This is a fun game. Should I recommend that this be moved to F&G?

That's not even remotely comparable.

The current way of doing things is theft, pure and simple. Medical costs across the board are 40% or more higher than they ought to be, just so lawyers can bank huge sums of money when a mistake is made.

The system isn't in the condition it is to protect people against doctor errors, because it does far, far more than that. End lawyer percentages and replace them with a flat fee, cap punitive damages, and people will still be able to sue when there really is malpractice.

 

[Kulindahr]

Like I think that your analogy was comparable?

Please

Yes, it was comparable.

No tort reform is having cruise ships tow yachts along for some of the passengers to use in case of sinking, while the rest have to use life boats -- but everyone's ticket includes the cost of the yachts.

Tort reform is making sure that there are life boats, and everyone pays equally.