Natural selection at work

[VX KAT]

I would take issue with one or two minor points: I think defensive medical costs have been getting quite a bit of discussion of late, so "noone mentions it" is no longer accurate.

oh, I was referring to LEGAL DEFENSE costs, the amount paid to investigate / defend the claims & lawsuits. Defensive medicine is a whole nutter topic.

That was something else specifically referenced in Hot Coffee. One of the Bush Admin's main reasons cited for pushing tort "reform" was ALL the wasteful court costs associated with frivolous lawsuits in the state of Texas which supposedly resulted in the premiums of EVERYONE going up. That's EXACTLY what I referring to above..Legal Defense Costs

As it turned out though, even after the "reforms" were passed reducing the number of cases that actually went to court (many of which were then/now handled instead through mandatory arbitration favoring the healthcare systems), and reducing damage cap liabilities even for legitimate cases of negligence, - CAREFUL HERE, you're not defining "damage cap", and as it's written, it infers ALL damages are capped.....which is exactly what I was trying to explain is a common misconception. I'm NOT aware of ANY law in any State that caps "special damages". "Special damages" are the actual medical care, treatment, lost income, etc, EVERYTHING EXCEPT PAIN & SUFFERING. Lawmakers have always ensured ALL financial aspects are covered for the injured party, and have never limited/capped them in any way.


healthcare costs for EVERYONE in Texas either remained the same overall or cost even more across the board.

So was it all just lip service in favor of big business? Depends on who you ask I guess.

"mandatory arbitration favoring the healthcare systems"....you realize you're painting the entire system with a broad stroke? Again, from my FRONT ROW seat and experience with mandatory arb, I LOST MANY cases.
The ARB panel is made up of 3 individuals...one picked by the PLAINTIFF, one picked by the DEFENSE, and the 3rd is PICKED BY THE OTHER TWO...so how is that "favoring the healthcare systems"?

With Medical Claims there is a certain hubris in parts of the medical community that resist any oversight and any development of "best practices" or "standardization of care". VERY TRUE!

In my business I have seen several frivolous claims aimed at simply finding the deepest pockets. Sometime these are personal injury claims, sometime its buyers remorse, where someone got what they paid for but found they diidn't make as much money as they though they wold so someone one else must be to blame.

EXTREMELY TRUE, and plaintiff attorneys wll often even ADMIT that's true....they're after the deepest pockets.

Here if you are found 5% liable and someone else is 95% and they do not have the money to pay the judgement you can be liable for the full award. Trying to fix this now but the lawyers say doing so would hurt the victim. They are worried about the victim here how about when a murdered gets out after 2.5 years because a bad childhood made him do it?

That's called "Joint & Several Liability", and it's law in MANY states....so how is that fair to an individual or business that has been found only 5% liable? That's where "for the greater good" philosophy comes into play in a society. But one must realize with "the greater good" comes a cost to all.