From: Dehede011@aol.com
Date: Wed Feb 12 2003 - 09:04:43 MST
In a message dated 2/12/2003 9:29:30 AM Central Standard Time,
rms2g@virginia.edu writes: Imagine that all participants in the economy would
be required to obtain a general liability insurance of certain quality, in a
market with many independent providers, and with a free-market court system.
Rafal,
Assuming that I understand what you are suggesting (Gee, that's
chancy) let me try one more round of simplification.
I have always read that we got into this mess where we need laws to
stop polluters because back in the 19th Century we made a conscious decision
to protect manufacturing, mining, etc., by removing the power to sue from
individual citizens. Yep, we said those sectors of our economy were so
important and needed encouragement to grow so bad that we wouldn't allow
individuals to sue them for damages caused by pollution and who knows what
else.
If we want to stop pollution and other such offenses dead in its
tracks why don't we restore the right of individuals to sue? Without even
getting heavy in our treatment can you imagine the average polluters reaction
to having 50 different individuals haul him into small claims court for
damage to their paint jobs either on their car or their house or maybe both?
You know long before OSHA, manufacturers lived in fear of their annual
inspection by their insurance company -- those guys could cancel your
insurance or worse yet raise the premiums. Many times the insurance guy's
report took the form, "you are doing X. Correct that situation by doing Y
and we won't raise your insurance premium by some astronomical amount Z."
Things tended to get fixed.
Ron H.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Feb 12 2003 - 09:07:58 MST