• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Maybe it's time for universal coverage, but not medical

Hayabusa Rider

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
This isn't a UHC thread. The government has a poor understanding at best and there are many already made.

I'm thinking there is something they should know and that's law. Few have the resources to participate in the legal system without severe hardship. If you are rich you do and if you are poor you have some but not a lot. The cost of defense is such that merely being charged is ruination for some. The government and private entities can coerce and attack knowing that.

If you are seriously wronged you might find someone to take a case for a huge cut. Let's have ordinary citizens have a chance and not just the rich and powerful.
 
So you're proposing free lawyers for everyone? Don't we already have enough without Uncle Sam creating a fresh income stream for the profession?

How to rein in the civil legal system is already fairly clear:

1. Establish "loser pays" rules
2. Cap punitive damages awards to reasonable levels
3. Disallow corporations to write off attorney's fees when they lose the case, reducing the financial advantage of big companies vs average citizens
4. Allow judges and juries more leeway to declare lawsuits frivolous, with deterrent-level punishments for those who file them.
 
glenn1 said:
So you're proposing free lawyers for everyone? Don't we already have enough without Uncle Sam creating a fresh income stream for the profession?

How to rein in the civil legal system is already fairly clear:

1. Establish "loser pays" rules
2. Cap punitive damages awards to reasonable levels
3. Disallow corporations to write off attorney's fees when they lose the case, reducing the financial advantage of big companies vs average citizens
4. Allow judges and juries more leeway to declare lawsuits frivolous, with deterrent-level punishments for those who file them.
Click to expand...

Suppose you are charged with a crime?
 
justoh said:
public defenders?
Click to expand...

It's probably a good thing these exist, but they tend to suck due to limited pay. The really good lawyers go private and charge a fortune for their skills. Maybe hire more of them so they're not trying to balance 10 cases at a time?
 
Universal Coverage? Screw that. I am not paying my taxes to cover the costs of aliens from other planets let alone galaxies.
 
diesbudt said:
Universal Coverage? Screw that. I am not paying my taxes to cover the costs of aliens from other planets let alone galaxies.
Click to expand...

Not to mention paying for dark matter and dark energy. We can't even see it but we gotta pay for it? Screw that.
 
Spungo said:
It's probably a good thing these exist, but they tend to suck due to limited pay. The really good lawyers go private and charge a fortune for their skills. Maybe hire more of them so they're not trying to balance 10 cases at a time?
Click to expand...

Not only that, but if you're middle class you will likely be denied a public defender. If you have any assets and reasonable income, the court will commonly deny requests for a public defender, so if you weren't broke before you will be after the SWAT team breaks down your doors, shoots your pets, plants drugs in your house, then keeps up the lie to avoid embarrassment.
 
I think it's an interesting idea - a combination of universal coverage and more decriminalization would really boost the ability of the common man to receive a fair hearing. In fact, universal coverage would probably demand decriminalization to keep down costs.
 
BoberFett said:
What you're point, jackass?
Click to expand...

Sorry. I think a lot of us were confused as to what he could have meant, since we have PDs already, but apparently you guys are arguing that everyone should be entitled to a PD. LOL. Fair enough. Sorry again.
 
glenn1 said:
1. Establish "loser pays" rules
2. Cap punitive damages awards to reasonable levels
3. Disallow corporations to write off attorney's fees when they lose the case, reducing the financial advantage of big companies vs average citizens
4. Allow judges and juries more leeway to declare lawsuits frivolous, with deterrent-level punishments for those who file them.
Click to expand...

What is reasonable? Caps on punative damages allow folks to turn moral decisions into calculated business decisions. "If I screw those folks over there I know my maximum possible downside is X with a Y chance of paying nothing while my upside is Z. The numbers work so screw them we shall". Leaving punative damages up to a jury serves as a deterent to calculated bad behavior.

The rest looks good. Finding a cure for frivolous lawsuits is difficult. The vast majority of civil cases (other than divorce) are company vs company contract disputes. It may take quite a bit of court time to sift through the mumbo-jumbo to figure out that a lawsuit is bogus.
 
Last edited:
I kind of see the OP's point because there is a universal right to accuse as well as the fact that the govt has the nearly unlimited power of "pursuing justice". Examples include, but are not limited to, George Zimmerman and the former Duke Lacrosse players.

If we go to an inquisitorial system, then rights that adverserial systems allow are taken away. However, we have an adversarial system which means that we have more rights, but then the rich may receive better outcomes than the poor.
 
Last edited:
I had Universal coverage at one point but dropped it cause Met Life was ripping me off. Actualy, got one of those $1.98 checks awarded to me.

Ohhh! that was Universal Life. Never mind.
 
IronWing said:
What is reasonable? Caps on punative damages allow folks to turn moral decisions into calculated business decisions. "If I screw those folks over there I know my maximum possible downside is X with a Y chance of paying nothing while my upside is Z. The numbers work so screw them we shall". Leaving punative damages up to a jury serves as a deterent to calculated bad behavior.

The rest looks good. Finding a cure for frivolous lawsuits is difficult. The vast majority of civil cases (other than divorce) are company vs company contract disputes. It may take quite a bit of court time to sift through the mumbo-jumbo to figure out that a lawsuit is bogus.
Click to expand...

I'm open on what the punative damage cap should be, I'm not going to argue about 3x actual damages, 10x, or another realistic number. If you want to punish companies for wrongdoing, do it via civil fines instead of jackpot payouts to plaintiffs. No more lawsuits where defendant negligence caused $10 in damages but the defendant is suing for $100 million in pain and suffering.
 
glenn1 said:
I'm open on what the punative damage cap should be, I'm not going to argue about 3x actual damages, 10x, or another realistic number. If you want to punish companies for wrongdoing, do it via civil fines instead of jackpot payouts to plaintiffs. No more lawsuits where defendant negligence caused $10 in damages but the defendant is suing for $100 million in pain and suffering.
Click to expand...

Limitations are worth discussing. Also I'm not suggesting attorneys be paid what they bill. Have them reimbursed like pharmacies at a level others determine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top