 |
Dingle
Gay for Mugtoe
Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 10433 |
i don't fucking get it
it seems the "victims" of 9-11 aren't really victims at all, theyve won the lottery at the expense of the taxpayers who werent fortunate enough to lose a family member.
hey i'm sorry for them and everything, but i fail to comprehend why we need to make them all millionaires. And this doesn't even include the approximately $250,000 in donations each family will recieve assuming that will ever be divied up. i just don't get it, and i don't understand how every taxpayer in the country is not outraged.
9/11 victims' families will get $1.6 million in aid
Families and victims of the Sept. 11 attacks would receive about $1 million under the terms of a tentative settlement package announced Thursday by a federal mediator.
Under the plan, according to Washington attorney Kenneth Feinberg, who is serving as "special master" of the fund, awards to families of the more than 3,000 people killed in the attacks would average $1.6 million. The approximately 2,000 people who were badly injured in the attacks would receive payments tailored to the severity of their injuries and the effect of those injuries on their jobs, he said.
The money will come from an open-ended federal fund created by Congress as part of the airline bailout legislation.
The Justice Department will begin taking claims today, and the first partial checks could be issued before New Year's Day.
Feinberg called the effort "an unprecedented expression of compassion" on the part of Americans to the victims and their families.
The fund's eventual size will be determined by the number of families that apply and the size of awards, but Feinberg said initial estimates suggest the program could cost about $6 billion.
...
full story here: http://www.startribune.com/stories/1576/913300.html
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
12-21-2001 06:51 PM |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
Dingle
Gay for Mugtoe
Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 10433 |
quote:
Originally posted by skalie
Something about trying to advoid lawsuits?
lawsuits for what? the government didn't cause their deaths, they arent liable.
quote:
But some victim representatives said the estimated awards were far lower than they had hoped for, particularly with regard to the compensation for pain and suffering.
"It's an absolute disgrace, and as I read it, it only gets worse," said Michael Cartier, whose brother was killed in the disaster.
it's a disgrace? this guy is complaining that his brother died and he's only getting $1.5 million? what's a disgrace is that he expects to profit from his brothers death.
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-21-2001 08:11 PM |
|
|
| |
|
CHiPsJr
Ginger-headed Troll
Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 7504 |
GAH!
Please provide me with all the analysis you can on why, exactly, the family of a WTC victim would be able to sue the US government. Even in a society as litigious as ours, that strikes me as ridiculously farfetched.
The airline bailout legislation was, of course, a travesty; this particular aspect of it strikes me as compassion run amok. Your main point is correct, Dingle, even if your language isn't what I'd choose.
I WILL say that the victims of WTC victims are probably more deserving of federal support than many FEMA aid recipients, such as those people who buy homes in flood plains and apply for federal relief when--by God, who'd have imagined it--the river floods and wipes out their possessions. Then, three years later, the same process. And again, two years after that...
And the victims are obviously more worthy recipients of federal aid than the airlines. That's another debate entirely, but here's an interesting fact to get your dander up: one of the tax cuts under consideration with the Republican stimulus package is a $500 tax break for each individual trip a person takes on an airplane. A more naked form of corporate welfare could scarcely be imagined.
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-21-2001 08:13 PM |
|
|
| |
|
SocialParasite
100% pure failtanium.
Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Beatrice, Nebraska
Posts: 19039 |
I think I'm going to be sick.
__________________
The pinnacle of Failbot technology.
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-21-2001 08:53 PM |
|
|
| |
|
downnotout
Fluffy Bunny
Registered: Nov 2001
Location: St.louis MO.
Posts: 245 |
Me too. Damn...it's shit like this that makes me grow more cynical by the day.:disgust:
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-21-2001 09:05 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Dingle
Gay for Mugtoe
Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 10433 |
and on a related note
http://www.startribune.com/stories/1576/913504.html
what the fuck is wrong with people? have they no shame?
"oh no, i'm not gonna blame the people responsible (the terrorists) because i cant sue them, im gonna blame someone who has money". It makes you wonder how much pain and suffering theyve really endured when they can't wait to get their hands on their 'cash bonus' for losing a relative. I bet this lady puts on a good grievous charade but secretly considers herself lucky that her husband was on that plane, now she gets to be rich!
quote:
Widow of Sept. 11 passenger sues airline for negligence
CONCORD, N.H. -- A woman whose husband died aboard one of the jetliners that slammed into the World Trade Center filed the first lawsuit against an airline over the Sept. 11 attacks Thursday, contending negligence on the part of United led to the hijacking.
Ellen Mariani of Derry, N.H., sued in federal court in New York City. Her husband, Louis Mariani, 58, was a passenger on United Flight 175, the second plane to hit the Trade Center. She and her children are seeking unspecified damages.
Her lawyer, Don Nolan, said the airline had a duty to "exercise the highest degree of care" with regard to safety. He would not elaborate on what the airline should have done differently to prevent the hijacking.
United spokeswoman Chris Brathwaite, who was in Chicago, had no comment on the lawsuit.
The suit was filed on the same day the Justice Department announced that victims' families and survivors of the attacks can begin applying for federal aid and will be eligible for at least $500,000 each.
Nolan said Mariani decided not to apply for money from the federal fund, which is open only to those families who agree not to sue the airlines.
...
full story here
[edit] and no doubt the jury will be composed of a bunch of bleeding hearts who will give her some ludicrous amound like $25 million
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-21-2001 09:52 PM |
|
|
| |
|
downnotout
Fluffy Bunny
Registered: Nov 2001
Location: St.louis MO.
Posts: 245 |
And don't forget about the lawyer! Who I am sure will recieve around 25% of the " reward " 
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-21-2001 10:06 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Astro74
Dodging the Issues
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1033 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dingle
lawsuits for what? the government didn't cause their deaths, they arent liable.
The only thing I can see the Federal Government being sued for is the simple fact that there was an investigation like 5 or 6 years earlier showing gross errors in airline safety.
Sadly the report was released on 9-11 of 1995 06 1996. So the FAA (Federal Govt.) had years of advance notice that there was errors in policy that could lead to hijacking, bombing, etc. That report and the fact of 9-11 shows the FAA did not heed the warning and did not take all the precautions to prevent it from happening.
So by doing that cause at the time the cost was to great to fix all the problems. That holds the FAA and the Federal Government liable for negligence. So by being negligent in the matter, that then holds the FAA and the Federal Government liable for claims put forth by families.
I am not sure where I would hold the airlines in this since the regulations are set by the FAA.
Yet I totally agree with you about how much of a disgrace it is on people trying to profit on the deaths of family members. Just that I see where the government has failed to put forth a truly good effort to prevent such a thing.
__________________
Jesus Loves YOU! It's Just everyone else thinks you're an Asshole!
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-21-2001 10:19 PM |
|
|
| |
|
WastedPotential
sociotard
Registered: Aug 2000
Location: the heart of an awl
Posts: 3692 |
quote:
Originally posted by downnotout
And don't forget about the lawyer! Who I am sure will recieve around 25% of the " reward "
1/3 of the award is the standard around here for cases taken on a contingency basis. it might be lower somewhere else, but i really doubt it.
i can just imagine the gold chain wearing, hair transplant sporting small-time personal injury lawyers doing another one of those local cable tv commercials in their standard unblinking style.
"Have you, or someone you know, been injured in a terrorist attack? Call the law offices of Fumunda & Smeg today for your no-obligation case evaluation. The first twenty callers will recieve a coupon good for half-price interest on their vehicle title loans."
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-21-2001 10:36 PM |
|
|
| |
|
downnotout
Fluffy Bunny
Registered: Nov 2001
Location: St.louis MO.
Posts: 245 |
haha! now that I think about it WP... that sounds about right.
BTW: My lawyer recieved more in the divorce settlement than I did... but I'm not bitter against lawyers or anything!
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-21-2001 11:15 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Spooky
twisty turny thing
Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
Posts: 7236 |
Don't get me wrong here ok, but don't you think its fascinating the way peoples attitudes to things change so easily?
__________________
I thought I was the walrus.
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-21-2001 11:37 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Mordecai
destractivegodofdarkness
Registered: Jan 2001
Location: Denver
Posts: 20219 |
Actually from what I understand, in a case like that, it'd be 1/3 if the case was settled out of court for a lesser amount, that is 1/3 plus expenses. If the case is taken to caurt and won, it's be more like 40%.
Greed is disgusting, but grief can make a person a bit mad.
-m
__________________
kak-zi> mordecai your stupit inggris is looding
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-22-2001 02:07 AM |
|
|
| |
|
euphorbia
caustic milk - hybrid
Registered: Apr 2001
Location:
Posts: 17206 |
quote:
Originally posted by Astro74
The only thing I can see the Federal Government being sued for is the simple fact that there was an investigation like 5 or 6 years earlier showing gross errors in airline safety.
box cutters were not illegal, I don’t even think knives were illegal to a certain size.
I also think its a joke, but the government is trying to keep the economy from crumbling and from many many more people from losing their jobs. Otherwise I don’t think they would give a rats ass about the lawsuits...which of course they shouldn’t imo...its not their job. In this circumstance they are trying to save our economies ass because our tort laws are ridiculous (who do we blame for That I fucking wonder?)
I knew this disgusting fat selfish petty bitch (ex-boyfriends mom) who was living off of some petty law suits she won, and I see her every time I hear of this kind of shit. This is one Of the traits I hate about our country, look in the yellow pages and see how many lawyers there are. why is when someone has to deal with any kind of hardship they feel they are entitled to money?
Even if they are not left crippled and unable to work.
I think its ridiculous that a clumsy woman who spills coffee on herself can sue the restaurant she bought it from. Has our society gone mad? I could probably go on forever about tort reform, but I’m still half asleep so Ill stop now.
__________________
taste the fucking rainbow
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-22-2001 01:02 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Smug Git
Arrogance Personified
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35917 |
I think that the frequency of litigation in the US (an increasing trend here too) is one of those things that might need nipping in the bud. Are the roots of the problems constitutional or is it just that courts award too much damages (if the damages awarded were less, it might not be worth the risk of litigating, maybe).
My guess would be that the practice of awarding exemplary damages might be part of it (rather than awarding damages according to the level of disadvantage accrued by the plaintiff and then fining the company rather than effectively giving the sum of the 'fine' (the exemplary damages) to the plaintiff). I guess that if a company is liable for its costs even if it wins they might settle a case that they could win in court, just because it is cheaper. But then, if the loser had to pay costs, how could the little guy achieve justice against the big guy? There would have to be some sort of cap on how much the winner could charge to the loser (there has been a problem with this in the UK in at least one case that I know of, where the winner (Mohammed Al-Fayed) won costs but had spent an exorbitant amount on defending the case).
One thing about legal systems, if you think that you have to change them, you have to do it cautiously.
As far as the government is concerned, I think that you should be ablr to sue them for negligence/incompetance but that should be proved rather than settled. I hope that they defend the case whatever the cost benefit of settling so that the responsibility that they bear, if any, can be properly thrashed out. If they were negligent, they should be sufficiently castigated not to do it again but if not then they should be able to quote the decision of a court case proving that it is not their fault. It is true that aviation experts have been uncomplimentary about domestic flight security; was that a majority view, or one held by respected figures or was it a few oddballs who said this and their statements are just being wheeled out for us now? Another sad fact of litigation is that there are always 'experts' for hire.
__________________
I want to live and I want to love
I want to catch something that I might be ashamed of
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-22-2001 01:19 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Caffeine
Caffeine
Registered: Aug 2000
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 7117 |
quote:
Originally posted by euphorbia
Im guessing youre joking. Youd have to be...still not awake.
Good morning.
Not at all, just hoping you defend your opinions, so I can voice mine correctly.
(Wouldn't want to... AGREE... with you or anything)
I'm quite awake, but in a few hours I won't be.
Again.
Good morning 
edit: Yikes, I'm all smiled out I think.
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-22-2001 01:40 PM |
|
|
| |
|
euphorbia
caustic milk - hybrid
Registered: Apr 2001
Location:
Posts: 17206 |
quote:
Originally posted by Caffeine
Not at all, just hoping you defend your opinions, so I can voice mine correctly.
(Wouldn't want to... AGREE... with you or anything)
I'm quite awake, but in a few hours I won't be.
Again.
Good morning
edit: Yikes, I'm all smiled out I think.
Its seems like you’re trying to pick a fight to me, if you really want a discussion try a little harder than "wrong", nope" and what ever else you said. Elaborate on why I’m wrong and Ill retort. I gave you a bit more detail than you gave me.
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-22-2001 01:59 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Caffeine
Caffeine
Registered: Aug 2000
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 7117 |
quote:
Originally posted by euphorbia
Its seems like you’re trying to pick a fight to me, if you really want a discussion try a little harder than "wrong", nope" and what ever else you said. Elaborate on why I’m wrong and Ill retort. I gave you a bit more detail than you gave me.
Pick a fight?
Sorry, I don't do fights. I hardly do debates on the asylum, because there is no panel to give closure.
I'll do just that in a few minutes, just need to get some Caffeine into me (via vyper's darling gift ) and make a post in the lost forum.
So, if you'll excuse me, I'll be doing just that.
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-22-2001 02:03 PM |
|
|
| |
|
euphorbia
caustic milk - hybrid
Registered: Apr 2001
Location:
Posts: 17206 |
Id certainly be interested in hearing your explanation of this..."Tort laws are self-fixing".
Just in case youre really are not trying to pick a fight Im sorry, I asked splat if it looked that way to him and he said yes, he agreed it seemed you were possibly trying to start one since you mimicked my reply to anthem yesterday in his "I hate America because of e-bay" thread.
Last edited by euphorbia on 12-22-2001 at 02:07 PM
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
|
12-22-2001 02:04 PM |
|
|
| |
|
Caffeine
Caffeine
Registered: Aug 2000
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 7117 |
quote:
Originally posted by euphorbia
Id certainly be interested in hearing your explanation of this..."Tort laws are self-fixing".
Just in case youre really are not trying to pick a fight Im sorry, I asked splat if it looked that way to him and he said yes, he agreed it seemed you were possibly trying to start one since you mimicked my reply to anthem yesterday in h
| |
|
|
![[new thread]](/images/vb/button_newthread_off.png "Post New Thread")
![[post reply]](/images/vb/button_newreply_off.png "Post A Reply")
They aren't ridiculous and we'd be in a lot more trouble if we didn't have their protection.