Only in America
-
I obviously didn;t make it clear whay I was against compensation - in all cases. It's not that the idea of a person getting an amount of money to 'pay' for some accident that could (or couldn't) have been avoided isn't a good one, it's that the person rearly gets anything worthwhile out of it. In the UK, there is a company called "Claims Direct" that helps you make claims against anybody. It's a no-win no-fee service, but if you win you get on average less than 10% of the awarded damages. THAT IS WHAT I AM PROTESTING ABOUT. I do not want to see a bunch of rich lawyers get even richer at the expense of other peoples suffering.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
OH. That's bad... How does any lawyer get away with taking 90%? Is there no such thing as competition over there? John
-
OH. That's bad... How does any lawyer get away with taking 90%? Is there no such thing as competition over there? John
They get away with it over [insert your country here] too. Remember that Lawyers don't find a case that supports the law, they find a law to support their case. And they also have their own language, wherein and hereto they shall wordeth thy contract to hideth the true. They'll always state in the small print on the telehone contract you sign, "Actual damages received by the plaintiff will be between ten and forty per cent". That of course means 10. And yes there's competition - plenty of it - between companies offering 9% and those offering 11%. :mad:
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
-
It is possible to come to a comprmise on every issue that will suit everybody on earth. It wont be easy, but it can be done. Of course, that will ultimately mean making sacrifices yourself, and not many people I know of are willing to do that when it really comes down to it.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
It is possible to come to a compromise on every issue that will suit everybody on earth. Rubbish. This is just so plainly untrue. Look at the Middle East, you've got two groups who want sole ownership of the same patch of dirt, because both think it belongs to them by the hand of god. How do you reconcile that ? I note they've been trying for a whil,e with no success. Christian As I learn the innermost secrets of the around me, they reward me in many ways to keep quiet. Men with pierced ears are better prepared for marriage. They've experienced pain and bought Jewellery.
-
It is possible to come to a comprmise on every issue that will suit everybody on earth. It wont be easy, but it can be done. Of course, that will ultimately mean making sacrifices yourself, and not many people I know of are willing to do that when it really comes down to it.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
No, it's not possible to come to a compromise for everyone. For instance, most Nazi's will only be happy when all jews are dead. Is that a compromise anyone can live with? Millitant Muslims are likely to only be happy when Israel no longer exists. Is that a viable compromise? Some people simply will not compromise, which means they simply cannot be reasoned with. -- Where are we going? And why am I in this handbasket?
-
The wonderful word is compramisation. If it's spelled correctly anyway. ;) If you can reach a desicion that pleases 9/10, yet has showed some consideration for the 1/10 left out, then you will have 10 happy party's. If you make the desicion to support the 9/10 and ignore the 1, you will have 9 party's unwilling to sacrifice and 1 very, very pissed one. And we all know what 1 very, very pisse party is capable of :|
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
You watch Spice Girls movies also ??? ----------------------- Reg : "Well, what Jesus blatantly fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."
-
You watch Spice Girls movies also ??? ----------------------- Reg : "Well, what Jesus blatantly fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."
Definitely not. Why, was that brought up?
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com Founder of The BLA
-
Definitely not. Why, was that brought up?
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com Founder of The BLA
-
reaching a consensus while all are still considered. ... You can never please people when their views exist so far outside the norms of society. So baling out from even bothing and making them hate you even more is the answer? Nothing is ever black and white, nothing will ever please everybody, but by considering the party's viewpoint from an unbiased position, and trying to understand why and how they drew their conclusions, would enable you to come to some kind of compramise that gave a little to each party, not matter how little that little may be. (if you can follow all those littles!) If you can't truly understand their views (and let's be blunt here, I doubt any of us really do), then how can you sit here and dictate to them what is right and what is wrong? Remember this? : Give a man a loaf of bread and he will feed his family for a week. Give a man a packet of wheat and he will grow wheat to turn into bread to feed his family for a year. Well the same concept applies to the current situation, but with reagards to views. We can't make truly fair and just desicions, so we shouldn't really look too deeply into these arguments. There are people who understand more, and these are the people making the desicions, but the final solution (if you will excuse the poor taste in using that phrase here) cannot be dicated to the terrorists. As hard as it may be to accept they are humans, and thus will not abandon their views - no matter how wrong they may appear to us - they are humans. Would you like somebody (or more importantly, would you accept somebody) telling you you could not be a Christian anymore, but instead must be a practising homosexual netball player? (Think of that in terms of concept and you should get the point I am pushing here). Both sides of the current situation are like deer with their horns locked. Neither side is willing to allow a concesion for the other, and thus nobody is going to move to the good-for-all solution. They will kjust keep fighting till one side breaks down. Five hundred years a go I would expect this, but today I would not.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff
>Remember this? : > >Give a man a loaf of bread and he will feed his family for a week. > >Give a man a packet of wheat and he will grow wheat to turn into bread to feed his family for a >year. I remember it being about fish but, whatever. The problem is our society is full of people that think you OWE them some beer, some drugs, and a big pot of money to go with it for reparations of some sort! Cheers, Ed Evans
-
>Remember this? : > >Give a man a loaf of bread and he will feed his family for a week. > >Give a man a packet of wheat and he will grow wheat to turn into bread to feed his family for a >year. I remember it being about fish but, whatever. The problem is our society is full of people that think you OWE them some beer, some drugs, and a big pot of money to go with it for reparations of some sort! Cheers, Ed Evans
It was a loaf of bread not a fish. How can you grow a fish yourself? You are getting confused with something else.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
Dr David Wulff, Phd Aqkuoerian Sciences dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com Founder of The BLA tlhIngan maH! Hab SoSlI' Quch! (in Aqkuoerian)
-
It was a loaf of bread not a fish. How can you grow a fish yourself? You are getting confused with something else.
:cool: -=:suss:=-
Dr David Wulff, Phd Aqkuoerian Sciences dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com Founder of The BLA tlhIngan maH! Hab SoSlI' Quch! (in Aqkuoerian)
No, no. Not grow a fish. "If you give a man a fish, you feed him for one day. If you teach a man to fish, you feed him for the rest of his life. " http://members.aol.com/AAArrt/fish.html Same meaning, I hope. ;P Cheers, Ed Evans
-
No, no. Not grow a fish. "If you give a man a fish, you feed him for one day. If you teach a man to fish, you feed him for the rest of his life. " http://members.aol.com/AAArrt/fish.html Same meaning, I hope. ;P Cheers, Ed Evans
I see what you mean, but I still prefer my version. :)
:cool: -=:suss:=-
Dr David Wulff, Phd Aqkuoerian Sciences dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com Founder of The BLA tlhIngan maH! Hab SoSlI' Quch! (in Aqkuoerian)
-
He was looking for someone with similar interests. Maybe he's "anna". :) To hell with those thin-skinned pillow-biters. - Me, 10/03/2001
Maybe he's "anna". You realise, of course, that this means war... ----------------------- The sermon on the mount... Man 1 : Hear that? Blessed are the greek. Man 2 : The greek? Man 1 : Well apparently, he's going to inherit the earth. Man 2 : Did anyone catch his name?
-
Definitely not. Why, was that brought up?
:cool: -=:suss:=-
David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com Founder of The BLA
Why, was that brought up? Well, I've seen the movie endlessly (young daughter ... please you've got to believe me), and Ginger uses the word "compromisation" when trying to resolve a dispute between band magaement and a group of semi-naked male Italian dancers. Just seemed to fit, for some reason ;P ;P ;P ----------------------- The sermon on the mount... Man 1 : Hear that? Blessed are the greek. Man 2 : The greek? Man 1 : Well apparently, he's going to inherit the earth. Man 2 : Did anyone catch his name?