Kamala Marx

[Joe_Hoopsier]

Yeah. Then you’re back to the concerns raised by crazed - costs, scarcity etc.

And man that would depress wages in that industry big time. There’s already a shortage

And God forbid that they are asked to get an ID for this healthcare. (Yes I know this is on a tangent, but...)

 

[DANC]

When do we start subsidizing guns for those unable to exercise that right due to the cost?

Bazinga!

 

[DANC]

I wanted to respond to this.

First of all, I don’t hate lawyers.

I do have a profound disdain for lawyers who make a living on BS lawsuits - especially when they do so under the guise of justice. I find that an Incredibly disingenuous sanitizing of their cynical, destructive racket.

As such, I’m quite proud to have this disdain, as I believe it’s richly deserved. I’m also proud to have disdain for payday lenders and other kinds of predatory actors in our society.

As for other, more reputable kinds of lawyers who actually do make gainful contributions to society, I have no particular beef. But I don’t really see them as “protecting me” in some kind of altruistic way. They’re people I pay to receive services I need, just as I pay accountants, consultants, tech services, insurers, and others.

We have two primary firms we use. And there isn’t an attorney in either of them who would express any issue with me - or me with them. But in no way do I view those relationships as you’ve described. I’m well aware that they’d just as easily represent the other guy in any dispute - and I’d expect nothing less of them.

It's kind of amusing to me that laws are written by lawyers, so that only lawyers (or those who study the law) understand them, and then those lawyers claim they're there to protect you (no offense, Brad).

 

[DANC]

Guys like Sowell, George Will and Victor Davis Hanson have been removed from public service by “the politics of oersonal destruction” choices of the DNC.

I wouldn't include George Will with Sowell and VDH.

He's too much a part of the DC establishment.

 

[DANC]

There is already a solution:

Logan’s Run.

But seriously, I wonder what % of healthcare is going to 80+ year olds trying to squeeze another year or two of life out of a terminal condition?

We already insure a certain level of healthcare that leads people to use ERs (very expensive) instead of preventative care. We thus incentivize poor people to do this. Dumb.

Also, re Sowell, remember that for any of these issues, there is no one solution, only trade offs. Put another way, every system has a cost. If one doesn’t see it with his proposed system or solution, it means he is missing something.

Right. We should dump them in the desert and let them fend for themselves.

I've never understood why ER is so expensive compared to a regular doctors office or surgeon? Because they can?

 

[DANC]

What incentive do people have to worry about the underlying prices of the goods/services they consume?

The primary goal has been for everybody to have access to whatever they need without any respect to cost. As such, most people don't care -- nor should we expect them to.

The incentive structure is all out of whack, by design. And, while the system itself has become extremely complicated, the reason the incentive structure is distorted isn't that complicated.



The whole thing is crazy. And, as hard as it is to believe, it really hasn't always been this way. But so long as our driving motivation is a mathematical impossibility, we should continue to expect these kinds of perverse outcomes....like what you'd expect to get out of a calculator when you begin with any random number and then type in "÷0" -- as if it responds by asking "What the hell are you asking me to do?"

It definitely hasn't been that way. In the 50s, my uncle made house calls..... and people paid him in cash or whatever they could barter.

I've seen a bill from the hospital for my sister's birth and it was a few hundred dollars (and yes, that was in 50s dollars, but even with inflation it was still cheap).

 

[Spartans9312]

It definitely hasn't been that way. In the 50s, my uncle made house calls..... and people paid him in cash or whatever they could barter.

I've seen a bill from the hospital for my sister's birth and it was a few hundred dollars (and yes, that was in 50s dollars, but even with inflation it was still cheap).

Shhh….litigation and administration

 

[DANC]

Shhh….litigation and administration

Ah, from those lawyers who are protecting us......

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

I wouldn't include George Will with Sowell and VDH.

He's too much a part of the DC establishment.

You're just saying that because he loathes Trump.

 

[DANC]

You're just saying that because he loathes Trump.

No, I'm saying that because he's part of the DC establishment. Uh, a columnist for WaPo......

The other 2 aren't. He doesn't have near their intellect.

George is, or was, a regular contributor for ABC - you know, the ones who moderated the last Presidential debate.

 

[DANC]

You're just saying that because he loathes Trump.

PS I always thought Will made good arguments for Conservatism. But before Trump came along, I started to question his - and others - enslavement to ideology.

Ideology is fine when it comes to developing policy in a vacuum. But the world doesn't operate in a vacuum and practicality has to be considered.

Will is one of those guys who lives in a DC bubble and is satisfied being the 'House Conservative', without making any big waves.

 

[UncleMark]

When do we start subsidizing guns for those unable to exercise that right due to the cost?

We already do. They're shielded from liability and all the costs associated with that.

 

[snarlcakes]

You're just saying that because he loathes Trump.

George Will is lightweight compared to Thomas Sowell.

 

[DANC]

George Will is lightweight compared to Thomas Sowell.

But he has a nice bow tie and he is obsessed with baseball

 

[hookyIU1990]

We already do. They're shielded from liability and all the costs associated with that.

Great, now let's carry it through to the individual who needs one.

 

[UncleMark]

Great, now let's carry it through to the individual who needs one.

You don't think those savings are passed on to the customer? Say it ain't so.

 

[stollcpa]

Guys like Sowell, George Will and Victor Davis Hanson have been removed from public service by “the politics of oersonal destruction” choices of the DNC.

What would Sowell be called by MSM? Uncle Tom.

 

[hookyIU1990]

You don't think those savings are passed on to the customer? Say it ain't so.

Reliable, inexpensive, handguns are more available now than ever.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

We already do. They're shielded from liability and all the costs associated with that.

I’ve always thought it was hard to imagine a scenario where the manufacturer of a gun would genuinely have any liability when one of their products is used in the commission of a crime….unless it involves some kind of malfunction, unlawful function, etc.

If some lunatic drives his Chevy into a crowd of people, who in their right mind would think GM liable for it?

 

[mcmurtry66]

I’ve always thought it was hard to imagine a scenario where the manufacturer of a gun would genuinely have any liability when one of their products is used in the commission of a crime….unless it involves some kind of malfunction, unlawful function, etc.

If some lunatic drives his Chevy into a crowd of people, who in their right mind would think GM liable for it?

True re defects or designs but liability is now attaching as a result of their marketing practices. There’s some similarities to tobacco lit

 

[UncleMark]

Reliable, inexpensive, handguns are more available now than ever.

I rest my case Yer Onner.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

True re defects or designs but liability is now attaching as a result of their marketing practices. There’s some similarities to tobacco lit

So they’re deliberately marketing their products as implements of criminality?

Hmm, OK. If that’s truly the case, I could see their liability. But I’d have to see exactly what that looks like and how a straight line could be drawn from this to the use of their product in the commission of some criminal act - and, I have to say that I expect to have to do a lot of squinting. ☺️

 

[mcmurtry66]

So they’re deliberately marketing their products as implements of criminality?

Hmm, OK. If that’s truly the case, I could see their liability. But I’d have to see exactly what that looks like and how a straight line could be drawn from this to the use of their product in the commission of some criminal act - and, I have to say that I expect to have to do a lot of squinting. ☺️

Tobacco was the blueprint in that part of their liability was predicated on marketing practices that targeted kids. With guns lawyers are circumventing the immunity stat by using consumer laws that prohibit irresponsible marketing whether that be kids or I guess shit like you too can be a one man militia!!

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Tobacco was the blueprint in that part of their liability was predicated on marketing practices that targeted kids. With guns lawyers are circumventing the immunity stat by using consumer laws that prohibit irresponsible marketing whether that be kids or I guess shit like you too can be a one man militia!!

And you wonder why I hold the grifters of Lawsuit, Inc. in such low esteem.

 

[mcmurtry66]

And you wonder why I hold the grifters of Lawsuit, Inc. in such low esteem.

You know what’s funny. My minion loves bass pro shop. He likes to climb around the boats. The aquarium and sit on atvs etc. last time we were there they had toy assault rifles

 

[BradStevens]

Reliable, inexpensive, handguns are more available now than ever.

Define inexpensive

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

You know what’s funny. My minion loves bass pro shop. He likes to climb around the boats. The aquarium and sit on atvs etc. last time we were there they had toy assault rifles

Definitely sounds like a place with multiple opportunities. What the hell are you doing wasting your time, energy and talents on medical malpractice? Johnny Morris is loaded...and, from what I can tell, basically asking for somebody to take his dough.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I’ve always thought it was hard to imagine a scenario where the manufacturer of a gun would genuinely have any liability when one of their products is used in the commission of a crime….unless it involves some kind of malfunction, unlawful function, etc.

If some lunatic drives his Chevy into a crowd of people, who in their right mind would think GM liable for it?

So they’re deliberately marketing their products as implements of criminality?

Hmm, OK. If that’s truly the case, I could see their liability. But I’d have to see exactly what that looks like and how a straight line could be drawn from this to the use of their product in the commission of some criminal act - and, I have to say that I expect to have to do a lot of squinting. ☺️

It’s all about the hazards and danger of the product compared with its social utility. Three wheeled ATV’s bit the dust because they were dangerous and they had nearly 0 social utility.

I’m all for repealing the federal immunity law because I think that would be the end of semi-auto long guns shooting high- velocity and highly destructive ammo. How would you like to be a manufacturer defending the utility of such a weapon in the hands of the general public? Wanna have fun murdering a metal target? Shoot a semi auto .22. Otherwise use a lever or bolt action weapon.

Another benefit of repealing immunity is the pressure put on the retail seller to know your customer. A punk kid with jumpy demeanor will have a harder time buying a gun or ammo.

Finally, for all the constitutional fundamentalists, I think most immunity laws violate the 7th Amendment, but I know the courts have ruled otherwise.

 

[BradStevens]

And you wonder why I hold the grifters of Lawsuit, Inc. in such low esteem.

If it’s a bad idea, these lawyers will suffer the consequences. (I share your skepticism about these suits).

Market forces work in the business of law, too.

 

[BradStevens]

It’s all about the hazards and danger of the product compared with its social utility. Three wheeled ATV’s bit the dust because they were dangerous and they had nearly 0 social utility.

I’m all for repealing the federal immunity law because I think that would be the end of semi-auto long guns shooting high- velocity and highly destructive ammo. How would you like to be a manufacturer defending the utility of such a weapon in the hands of the general public? Wanna have fun murdering a metal target? Shoot a semi auto .22. Otherwise use a lever or bolt action weapon.

Another benefit of repealing immunity is the pressure put on the retail seller to know your customer. A punk kid with jumpy demeanor will have a harder time buying a gun or ammo.

Finally, for all the constitutional fundamentalists, I think most immunity laws violate the 7th Amendment, but I know the courts have ruled otherwise.

The social utility is killing an attacker. How does the semi-auto long gun fail in that regard?

 

[CO. Hoosier]

The social utility is killing an attacker. How does the semi-auto long gun fail in that regard?

The statistics are not on the side of that. Moreover there are much safer and better alternatives as far as home defense is concerned.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

If it’s a bad idea, these lawyers will suffer the consequences. (I share your skepticism about these suits).

Market forces work in the business of law, too.

Not nearly as well as they do in most of our endeavors, from my perspective. That's why I favor loser pays laws -- increase the disincentives for filing garbage lawsuits, decrease the incentives to settle them out of convenience.

But it brings up a question. Is it as common for these folks to go broke when their "business" fails as it is for people who invest their savings to start actual businesses?

 

[BradStevens]

Not nearly as well as they do in most of our endeavors, from my perspective. That's why I favor loser pays laws -- increase the disincentives for filing garbage lawsuits, decrease the incentives to settle them out of convenience.

But it brings up a question. Is it as common for these folks to go broke when their "business" fails as it is for people who invest their savings to start actual businesses?

*sigh*

A law firm is an “actual business.” And it is a business without the need for scare quotes. Are you able to discuss lawyers without letting your obvious disdain peek through?

Loser pay laws certainly would fix the problem you are concerned with. And as a result, a lot of poor and middle class people would never have access to justice.

Yes, plaintiffs firms go under. Yes lawyers declare bankruptcy. No, not all lawyers are rich.

I used every last dime I had to go into being a partner/owner of my law firm. Delayed buying a house. For the first couple of years, racked up a ton of debt. And I didn’t get a dime from family. I’ve taken just as much risk as any normal “business.” Once again, you’re showing your ignorance of things related to the field of law.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

That's why I favor loser pays laws -

Loser pay laws are a terrible idea. Let’s say you are 50% disabled, and can’t do your normal job, because of a medical mistake. You go to your lawyer and he says the case is 50/50, depending on which expert the jury likes. If you lose, your retirement savings, your college fund, and your home equity will be wiped out. What do you do? The very wealthy, and the very poor will say sue. The middle class is screwed.

We already have loser pay rules for frivolous litigation.

 

[hookyIU1990]

Define inexpensive

Couple hundred bucks.

You can buy a hi point pistol in 9mm for under $200

https://www.budsgunshop.com/product_info.php/products_id/48302/hi+point+916+c-9+8+1+9mm+p+3.5

 

[CO. Hoosier]

*sigh*

A law firm is an “actual business.” And it is a business without the need for scare quotes. Are you able to discuss lawyers without letting your obvious disdain peek through?

Loser pay laws certainly would fix the problem you are concerned with. And as a result, a lot of poor and middle class people would never have access to justice.

Yes, plaintiffs firms go under. Yes lawyers declare bankruptcy. No, not all lawyers are rich.

I used every last dime I had to go into being a partner/owner of my law firm. Delayed buying a house. For the first couple of years, racked up a ton of debt. And I didn’t get a dime from family. I’ve taken just as much risk as any normal “business.” Once again, you’re showing your ignorance of things related to the field of law.

Plus, we are personally liable for the line of credit used to meet payroll in the slow months or if we don’t win an expensive case.

 

[hookyIU1990]

It’s all about the hazards and danger of the product compared with its social utility. Three wheeled ATV’s bit the dust because they were dangerous and they had nearly 0 social utility.

I’m all for repealing the federal immunity law because I think that would be the end of semi-auto long guns shooting high- velocity and highly destructive ammo. How would you like to be a manufacturer defending the utility of such a weapon in the hands of the general public? Wanna have fun murdering a metal target? Shoot a semi auto .22. Otherwise use a lever or bolt action weapon.

Another benefit of repealing immunity is the pressure put on the retail seller to know your customer. A punk kid with jumpy demeanor will have a harder time buying a gun or ammo.

Finally, for all the constitutional fundamentalists, I think most immunity laws violate the 7th Amendment, but I know the courts have ruled otherwise.

Semi auto rifles have been killing deer for nearly a century. Isn't that common usage? Hell, my deer rifle is now an AR and they're quickly becoming the platform of choice among younger hunters.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Definitely sounds like a place with multiple opportunities. What the hell are you doing wasting your time, energy and talents on medical malpractice? Johnny Morris is loaded...and, from what I can tell, basically asking for somebody to take his dough.

No that shit is too awful. My partners and I started and invest in businesses. We have six right now all enjoying varying degrees of failure. With law comes an arrogance that you can do anything. We’ve been humbled

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Semi auto rifles have been killing deer for nearly a century. Isn't that common usage? Hell, my deer rifle is now an AR and they're quickly becoming the platform of choice among younger hunters.

Why can’t you use a lever or bolt action?

 

[hookyIU1990]

Why can’t you use a lever or bolt action?

Why should I have to?