Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Political discussion thread
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedPolitical discussion thread

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 4142434445 303>
Author
Message
The Doctor View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 23 2005
Location: The Tardis
Status: Offline
Points: 8543
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 02 2008 at 16:57
Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by The Doctor The Doctor wrote:

Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Two years after the accident, Shank and her husband, Jim, were awarded about $1 million in a lawsuit against the trucking company involved in the crash. After legal fees were paid, $417,000 was placed in a trust to pay for Debbie Shank's long-term care.

Wal-Mart had paid out about $470,000 for Shank's medical expenses and later sued for the same amount. However, the court ruled it can only recoup what is left in the family's trust.

The Shanks didn't notice in the fine print of Wal-Mart's health plan policy that the company has the right to recoup medical expenses if an employee collects damages in a lawsuit."

 
Unfortunately, those types of clauses (subrogation clauses) are typical in almost all insurance policies.  Generally, if someone collects money from his or her insurance company and also wins damages against the person who caused the harm, the insurance company has a right to collect the damages won, up to the amount of the insurance payout.  Sadly, there is nothing uncommon about that.  And while I'm no fan of Walmart, this case has more to do with the fact that insurance companies are evil than with Walmart being evil. 
That comes from the notion that one can't collect twice on the same claim. It's not unfortunate, just logical, otherwise the court system would be flooded with repeatitive claims. I'm not saying the insurance companies are nice guys being the thieves and usurers they are, but they are absolutely right in this case.
 
It is unfortunate in many circumstances because it leaves the injured person undercompensated.  Let's say for example, someone has an insurance policy which covers them for up to $200,000.  They are injured in an accident and suffer $600,000 worth of damage.  The insurance company pays them the 200 grand, and they sue the person who caused the injury.  Let's assume that the court fully compensates the victim, awarding the injured party 600 grand.  You might think that the injured party has now been overcompensated.  However, the injured party must also pay an attorney, and in these types of cases that usually 1/3 of the award.  So the injured party get 200 from the insurance company, 600 from the person who caused the injury, less 200 which he must pay to an attorney.  This leaves the injured party with 600, the amount of his injury.  However, when the insurance company then takes 200, this leaves the injured party with only 400, undercompensating the victim for his injuries.  I simplified the numbers of course, but this often happens in these cases.
 
Further, if the court undercompensates the victim, or the defendant is unable to pay all of the injured party's damages, the first 200 goes to the insurance company.  So let's say the court awards 600, but the injured party only has assets/insurance enough to pay 200.  That 200 (minus the attorney fees of course) goes to the insurance company, leaving the injured party with only 200 for an injury that costs 600. 


Edited by The Doctor - August 02 2008 at 17:01
I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you?
Back to Top
IVNORD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 13 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 02 2008 at 20:44
Originally posted by The Doctor The Doctor wrote:

Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by The Doctor The Doctor wrote:

Originally posted by Slartibartfast Slartibartfast wrote:

Two years after the accident, Shank and her husband, Jim, were awarded about $1 million in a lawsuit against the trucking company involved in the crash. After legal fees were paid, $417,000 was placed in a trust to pay for Debbie Shank's long-term care.

Wal-Mart had paid out about $470,000 for Shank's medical expenses and later sued for the same amount. However, the court ruled it can only recoup what is left in the family's trust.

The Shanks didn't notice in the fine print of Wal-Mart's health plan policy that the company has the right to recoup medical expenses if an employee collects damages in a lawsuit."

 
Unfortunately, those types of clauses (subrogation clauses) are typical in almost all insurance policies.  Generally, if someone collects money from his or her insurance company and also wins damages against the person who caused the harm, the insurance company has a right to collect the damages won, up to the amount of the insurance payout.  Sadly, there is nothing uncommon about that.  And while I'm no fan of Walmart, this case has more to do with the fact that insurance companies are evil than with Walmart being evil. 
That comes from the notion that one can't collect twice on the same claim. It's not unfortunate, just logical, otherwise the court system would be flooded with repeatitive claims. I'm not saying the insurance companies are nice guys being the thieves and usurers they are, but they are absolutely right in this case.
 
It is unfortunate in many circumstances because it leaves the injured person undercompensated.  Let's say for example, someone has an insurance policy which covers them for up to $200,000.  They are injured in an accident and suffer $600,000 worth of damage.  The insurance company pays them the 200 grand, and they sue the person who caused the injury.  Let's assume that the court fully compensates the victim, awarding the injured party 600 grand.  You might think that the injured party has now been overcompensated.  However, the injured party must also pay an attorney, and in these types of cases that usually 1/3 of the award.  So the injured party get 200 from the insurance company, 600 from the person who caused the injury, less 200 which he must pay to an attorney.  This leaves the injured party with 600, the amount of his injury.  However, when the insurance company then takes 200, this leaves the injured party with only 400, undercompensating the victim for his injuries.  I simplified the numbers of course, but this often happens in these cases.
 
Further, if the court undercompensates the victim, or the defendant is unable to pay all of the injured party's damages, the first 200 goes to the insurance company.  So let's say the court awards 600, but the injured party only has assets/insurance enough to pay 200.  That 200 (minus the attorney fees of course) goes to the insurance company, leaving the injured party with only 200 for an injury that costs 600. 
The cost of lawsuit, which the attoney fees are a part of, is your private expense. You can buy a new car with the rest of the award money, and technically both the attorney fees and the car fall into the same cathegory. An insurance policy should not cover your persobal expenses. I realize that paying your lawyer is an unfortunate circumstance, but as an alternative you can handle your lawsuit pro se which may turn out to be even more unfortunate. Unless you are a trial lawyer of course. Not that I consider a lawyer's take of 1/3 of a multi-million dollar award to be fair but . . .
Back to Top
Padraic View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31165
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 03 2008 at 08:16
Originally posted by IVNORD IVNORD wrote:

Originally posted by NaturalScience NaturalScience wrote:

  I've listened to these types of shows on occasion
Isn't it just a waste of time?LOL


I think there's some pretty good humor value sometimes.  "You're a great American!" "No, you're a great American!".  Then the caller just regurgitates what was just said to them about 5 minutes ago.  Very bizarre feedback machine.
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29620
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 05 2008 at 19:36





Edited by Slartibartfast - August 14 2008 at 17:32
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 08 2008 at 14:16
I really don't have a personal thing against Hillary Clinton, but I am beggining to DESPISE her. She's going to ruin the party. I really do think the Dems had 08 won....and I'm fearing 8 more years of Bush, (er McCain) are coming. Thanks Hill.

And on other news, I heard the country of Iraq had an $80+ Billion profit this year from oil. Well, very little of it was being spent on Iraq.....instead most of it was being held in banks, some owned by Americans.

I remember now why I stopped watching the news
Back to Top
Padraic View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31165
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 08 2008 at 15:18
Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

I really don't have a personal thing against Hillary Clinton, but I am beggining to DESPISE her. She's going to ruin the party. I really do think the Dems had 08 won....and I'm fearing 8 more years of Bush, (er McCain) are coming. Thanks Hill.



What did she do?  And you talk as if the Dems had already lost...Obama is still the favorite to win the election by most polling data I've seen.
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 08 2008 at 21:27
Something about making sure her supporters voices are heard...I don't know it sounded alot to me like shes gunna keep fighting basically....
Hey, I'm very paranoid! I would've bet money on the Dems winning it in 08 but they have a tendency to blow these things...but I really really hope I'm wrong.
Back to Top
Pnoom! View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: September 02 2006
Location: OH
Status: Offline
Points: 4981
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 08 2008 at 21:34
At this point, if the Dems lose it's their own fault, not Hillary's (even though I don't like her much at all).

I was listening on the radio this morning to an interview with someone who worked on the Bush campaigns and some notable Democratic election expert and both agreed that polls indicate that most democrats will vote democrat, and that most republicans will vote republican (and that the number of each likely to vote against their party are pretty small and pretty close to equal).  And when you consider that Obama is more exciting than McCain, it's likely more democrats will vote than republicans, which means that if independents don't swing massively towards McCain, Obama should still win.

I hope that made sense.
Back to Top
Padraic View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31165
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 08 2008 at 21:49
Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

Something about making sure her supporters voices are heard...I don't know it sounded alot to me like shes gunna keep fighting basically....
Hey, I'm very paranoid! I would've bet money on the Dems winning it in 08 but they have a tendency to blow these things...but I really really hope I'm wrong.


Well, the only "problem" is that I have heard that a non-trivial percentage of her supporters are going to vote for McCain (don't have a source for this).  Depending on what percentage that is (or if some choose to just stay at home), that might seriously influence the outcome.  But you can hardly blame her for the reactions of her supporters.
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 08 2008 at 22:19
Eh, I'm probably just projecting and she's an easy target.
Point is, my confidence in the Dems = not very high

I really don't see how Barack can lose the election, it's true. I just hope they don't find a way to blow it
Back to Top
Slartibartfast View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29620
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 14 2008 at 17:28




Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...

Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28045
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 29 2008 at 14:07
About that woman McCain chose for whatever:

"She's exactly who this country needs to help me fight the same old Washington politics of me first and country second," the presumptive Republican nominee said at a Dayton, Ohio, rally of about 15,000 supporters, who welcomed the surprise pick of the relatively unknown politician with cheers and flags.


Angry  R---R----R----RAGE!!!!!! Angry

f**k you so much, McCain.

I hate you for that.
Back to Top
Leningrad View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 15 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 7991
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 29 2008 at 14:26
Fascism lives.
Back to Top
laplace View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 06 2005
Location: popupControl();
Status: Offline
Points: 7606
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 29 2008 at 14:37
hahaha having McCain pass on from old age leaving this nobody in charge of Failland should be quite funny
Back to Top
Leningrad View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 15 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 7991
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 29 2008 at 14:40
Originally posted by laplace laplace wrote:

hahaha having McCain pass on from old age leaving this nobody in charge of Failland should be quite funny
 
I'd vote McCain just to see this happen.
Back to Top
laplace View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 06 2005
Location: popupControl();
Status: Offline
Points: 7606
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 29 2008 at 14:46
me too

I was reading a thread last night, somewhere or other, that was running commentary on the DNC thing and everyone was very enthused and inspired about the Democrats. today I watched short clips of it on the news and it came of as absolute idiocy - total pandering soundbyte morontopia. and Obama is considered a great candidate

politics everywhere are such a candy mess and democracy's to blame =P
Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28045
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 29 2008 at 14:56
Although, reconsidering his statement there, if applied to only government officials...people elected to serve the country, state or whatever, then I guess that would be a good thing. He's said stuff about self-sacrifice for country before, though, which I am way wary of.
Back to Top
Leningrad View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 15 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 7991
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 29 2008 at 15:04
The world would be a much better place if everyone read more Kropotkin.
Back to Top
IVNORD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 13 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 29 2008 at 17:52
Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:

Although, reconsidering his statement there, if applied to only government officials...people elected to serve the country, state or whatever, then I guess that would be a good thing. He's said stuff about self-sacrifice for country before, though, which I am way wary of.
  And what did you think he'd been referring to? George Washington politics?
Back to Top
IVNORD View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 13 2006
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 29 2008 at 17:53
Originally posted by Chameleon Chameleon wrote:

The world would be a much better place if everyone read more Kropotkin.
  Are you sure of that?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 4142434445 303>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.547 seconds.

Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.