Political & Elections

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: Outsourcing


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 582
Date: Jun 6, 2011
RE: Outsourcing
Permalink  
 


Frivolous lawsuits are actually rare - particularly in medical malpractice. They are rare across the board, however. The system is pretty good at weeding them out and lawsuits are expensive to bring. There seems to be a belief that companies and insurance companies gladly settle frivolous lawsuits. They don't. I practiced insurance defense law and know many who still do. We saw very few frivolous law suits and did  not settle the ones that were. We just delayed and papered the other side until they went away. It doesn't take long. When I practiced, we also papered and delayed many legitimate law suits, in which people were seriously injured. We were good at it and paid well for it. Insurance companies will spend tens of thousands of dollars to defend a case they could settle for 10% of that.

Research has shown that the vast majority of people injured in medical malpractice do not even sue. Many cannot find an attorney to take their cases, because a med mal case is very expensive and there is no guarantee of any recovery. Most plaintiff attorneys turn away about 80% of the people who come to them with med mal cases for example. Only successful plaintiff's attorneys can afford to take on a sophisticated case that will drag on for years, absorbing the thousands of dollars in expenses all along the way. Successful attorneys do not file frivolous lawsuits. If you add "loser pays" to the already exorbitant expenses to sue, fewer and fewer legitimately injured people would be able to sue. The expense of taking care of them would fall to the rest of us. Those at fault would be the only winners. The cost would just get shifted.



__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 825
Date: Jun 5, 2011
Permalink  
 

Lawyers serve many useful functions in society.

But there are TOO many of them.

What kind of society trains more lawyers than physicans?

Law Schools are easy money for educational institutions.

If tort reform were passed so that "loser pays", the glut of ambulance chasers would shortly be abated.

When everybody and his idiot cousin is one, the status of "learned profession" becomes questionable. There is already starting to be a recognition that "diploma mill" lawyers are inferior.

 

 

 



__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 660
Date: Jun 5, 2011
Permalink  
 

The difference between engineers and lawyers is that engineers are for the most part productive while lawyers are like a cancer on society.

__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 825
Date: Jun 5, 2011
Permalink  
 

Right now we are engaged in a "trial by combat" or at least an economic competition to see whether free/cheap technical education or pay to be a lawyer, etc. is better for a countries  economy.

It is an experiment that is underway. The results will be known in 20 to thirty years.



__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 582
Date: Jun 5, 2011
Permalink  
 

How does just spitting out more engineering grads create jobs? How do physicists create jobs?  Are doctors value added or service?  Not all engineers create things. How is a mechanical engineer who creates a plan for a mechanical system for a new building any more valuable than the lawyer who gets the zoning changed so the building can be built or the accountant who handles payroll for the developer and the contractor? The problem is the freeing up of money so all these things can fall into place.



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 289
Date: Jun 4, 2011
Permalink  
 

God you guys are stupid. Simply make technical education free...

"Free" as in---gasp!---government subsidized?



__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 2549
Date: Jun 4, 2011
Permalink  
 

Abyss:

Sounds Communistic. Looks Communistic. Feels Communistic. 

Not going to taste  it to learn if it is Communistic. evileye



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 370
Date: May 31, 2011
Permalink  
 

God you guys are stupid. Simply make technical education free (BS/MS/PhD). Flood the market with engineers. It will depress wages for engineers, but at the same time spur overall job creation within the economy. The point of this is to push the best and brightest into value creation fields (ie: not service industries like law/accounting/finance).

The East Asian economies have already figured it out. You want the highest per capita amount of technical professionals possible within your economy. No joke, it should probably be the single largest goal of the US domestic economic policy.

__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 2549
Date: May 26, 2011
Permalink  
 

Raises the wealthy and middle class in  foreign countries which means the new wealth buys more US taxpayer subsidized corn. 

And if they are really well off, they will visit USA's National Parks (Taxpayer supported) and to the tax abaded, outlet-discount malls where they can buy better quality stuff made in their home countries but unable to buy there.  evileye



__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 825
Date: May 26, 2011
Permalink  
 

How are the other G8 nations avoiding "job predation"?

Hint, they don't allow firms to close domestic factories when they "go offshore".

The US is the only developed country with no restrictions on capital flight. Has that helped US investors?

 



__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 2549
Date: May 26, 2011
Permalink  
 

http://techpolicy.typepad.com/tpp/2004/03/tax_breaks_for_.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/28/AR2010092806143.html pertinent part is under the bellyroll advert. ashamed

Lower the corporate tax rate, and you bring jobs back homeevileye

BUT the foreign tax rate is less than USA because those countries wanted to bring jobs to their country. So if USA lowers the tax rate to match foreign countries' rates, Will those countries again lower their tax rates? Much like the tax abatement race that states have to attract business development. ?evileye



-- Edited by longprime on Thursday 26th of May 2011 10:21:04 AM

__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 728
Date: May 26, 2011
Permalink  
 

What bothers me now is that I am getting marketing phone calls from India. I flat out ask them are you calling from India, and I always get, yes, Mam I am. I than tell them to remove my name from the list. You can tell on caller i.d. because it comes up with an extremely long phone number. Here's my question. Can companies that do this skirt the Do Not Call law since they are calling from overseas, or do they have to adhere to our law and pay a fine if they do it?

__________________
Raising a teenager is like nailing Jello to a tree


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 825
Date: May 25, 2011
Permalink  
 

If all the outsourcing that has been done were such a great deal for business, why has the stock market been in the dumper for a DECADE?

It is almost as if outsourcing gave only transitory benefits. These allowed key executives to "cook the books" for a quarter or three to collect bonuses. Then the longer term degradation of the American economy "bit" and reduced business prospects.

The American worker IS the American consumer. Degrade the worker , degrade the economy.

 



__________________


Guru

Status: Offline
Posts: 2549
Date: May 25, 2011
Permalink  
 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304520804576343070058872708.html?mod=WSJ_myyahoo_module

What advantage would a domestic company have to outsource, if the outsourcing company had to pay local/domestic  wages and benefits?

I wondered when this would happen.  Likewise many public agencies want to outsource building maintenance-I wonder if those companies have 'employees-contractors' who are less than desireable? 



__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.



Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard