It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wal-Mart sues brain damaged woman

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by thought
reply to post by ATruGod
 


No! Poor people can afford lots of things they couldn't previously thanks to Wal-Mart! Mom-and-Pop stores don't employ that many people, anyways.


Thats the bottom line here isnt it?



Poor people can afford lots of things they couldn't previously


And probably still cant but its a great illusion.




posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by ATruGod
 


You know what, you're right. The world sucks because you say it does. And for no other reason.



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by thought
reply to post by ATruGod
 


You know what, you're right. The world sucks because you say it does. And for no other reason.


Now you sound like my wife...way to go.

Back on topic.....JackInThBox actually has a good point. It was for future care not reimbursment and if they want it that bad then go ahead and give it to them but make them responsible for any future needs.



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by DezertSkies
 


There is a conundrum with Wal-Mart though. Not everything about them is bad, they are not great either though. In this area they employ a very large number of people. There are not many other jobs available here either that are jobs that have some security. Everyone needs to get food Wal-Mart happens to have the cheapest food in the area, thus there will be a constant need for jobs as long as there is food to sell.

Can you tell me that you believe in everything the companies stand for and do in the places you shop? If not you are no better than me in this case.

With this case I am not saying I am not wrong for not boycotting them. If that makes me weak and spineless in your eyes so be it, I also have a family to support. I work to make every penny spent count; I see no need to waste fuel and funds to drive all over town to get things I can get in one spot cheaper. Again if that makes me weak or spineless so be it, I like to think of it as frugal. I still do not spend money at McDonalds or Best Buy do to issues with them so I am boycotting some places. But in the light of recent economic events I will not waste cash driving all over. Basically I can get double the food at Wal-Mart that I can other places around here for the same price. But that is really not what this thread is about.

With this though I do though think their choice should be on a case by case basis. There is no need to take what this woman has gotten. Absolutely none at all. If they were trying to scam Wal-Mart fine or if the woman could still find work no big deal as well. But this woman is not able to do anything.

Raist



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 02:49 PM
link   
the system is set up like the old shell game
millions of dollars get tossed about in an apparent settlement scheme that invariably ends up with the lions share back with the lawyers and the big corps
the injured are left with next to nothing
its a bigger problem than just wall-mart
it's the lawyers that have us all by the short and curlies



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by thought

Fine, I'll bite. Name one person you know in America that is hungry with nowhere to turn for food.


I can name you about 100 people, offhand, by name, that i see and try to help everyday with that exact problem. I give away a lot of food to the hungry people and now that i have more time on my hands i might try to get something going where i can bring a big tub of rice and beans to the park where all the starving people i know hang out. Ian was doing it for a while for the "food not bombs" program but he's not doing it anymore. There's the shelter and they serve free dinner, but only for an hour a day and it's during a time when no public transportation available, and they're located a few miles out in the middle of nowhere. Disabled people who can't beg a ride from the few people in town who own cars can't walk 3 miles of steep uphill along a highway with no safe sidewalk to get a meal, so they end up hungry. This week i might be in the hungry group too, as i'm out of food and have a couple dollars left. Looks like i'll be eating rice this week if i can get some. If you're hungry, you can stop by the government subsidized housing (AKA the "projects") where i live and have some rice when i make some.

Now stop pretending that there's not gross economic and social injustice in this oh-so-civilized modern monstrosity and do something about it you damn slackers!



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 02:51 PM
link   
As much as I despise WalMart and their treatment of their employees, their actions to recover medical costs paid out for this lady is an everyday procedure when it comes to injury cases. Almost EVERY health and auto insurance carrier has a "subrogation" clause in their policies if you recover a settlement from a third party.
I lay the lame squarely at the feet of her attorney who, if worth the ink his/her license is printed on, should have factored this cost into any settlement negotiation before closing the deal. In most cases, the insurance carrier will reduce their subrogation amount....some as much as 40%.
Perhaps this lady has a potential malpractice claim against her attorney.



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by DezertSkies
 


Well, I do admit that Wal-Mart's actions don't seem to make any sense here. That being said, call me stubborn but I really find it hard to believe that there are hungry people with no recourse for food. Are there not food pantries, soup kitchens, etc.? I know we have many of those in my town.



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by thought
 


I'm hungry. Ten miles to soup kitchen. Pouring rain today.

EDIT to add: Not to mention the fact that people shouldn't need handouts to keep from starving in the most powerful country on the planet!



[edit on 3/31/0808 by jackinthebox]



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


I'm sorry, but it's impossible to create utopia! There are hungry people in every country, what do you propose?



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by thought
 




I'm sorry, but it's impossible to create utopia! There are hungry people in every country, what do you propose?


Ending corporate socialism, and ending social corporatism.






[edit on 3/31/0808 by jackinthebox]



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


I'm all for ending the first but I'm not quite sure I know what the second one is.



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by thought
 



I'm all for ending the first but I'm not quite sure I know what the second one is.


Corporatism is most commonly mistaken as Capitalism. Free-Market trade is not free at all when the game is fixed to be stacked against the people.



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


If you'd like to U2U me about how to "un-stack" it or start another thread on that topic, that would be great. Here, maybe even, but I do feel we are starting to get a bit off-topic.



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 03:26 PM
link   
reply to post by thought
 



If you'd like to U2U me about how to "un-stack" it or start another thread on that topic, that would be great. Here, maybe even, but I do feel we are starting to get a bit off-topic.


You will find this sort of material discussed here in your travels through the ATS realm. I agree that we may be getting too far off topic for this thread. The rabbit hole is far deeper than you may expect. If you wish, you may visit my profile page to find some of the threads I have written which talk about socio-economics from various angles.

Here is a start...

Do Not Watch This Video...
"Let Them Eat Cake!"

Welcome to ATS!



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Raist
reply to post by DezertSkies
 


Can you tell me that you believe in everything the companies stand for and do in the places you shop? If not you are no better than me in this case.



Yes. I support the "companies" i believe are doing righteous things for the good of us all. From the locally grown organic foods i buy to the pesticide free organic hemp and cotton clothing, all of which i buy from "mom and pop" places which haven't been put out of business by the big blue beast yet.
I don't eat any meats or any animal products, and don't purchase anything that creates a demand for non sustainable stuff like plastic. I show up at Ralph and Barbara's market with my own hemp and organic cotton shopping bags and fill it with fresh fruits, vegetables, and protein foods like tempeh, almost of which come from within the county i live in. My Tempeh guy i see and talk to everyday walking on the streets, just like all the other businesses i support who promote and practice sustainability. I work at one of the top restaurants in the state(4 star dining or so says zagat) and the owner/chef who works alongside me practices stuff like conserving every little last drop of water. When i need stuff like rosemary, thyme, mint, or other spices and herbs, I or another cook goes into the hills and harvests what we need from sustainable patches of herbs and plants. I'll go to war if they try to build the devil's temple in my town, I stand firm for what i believe in.

What do you stand firm for? Instant gratificatfion of being able to afford a double dose of poison for your family? Read the labels on the foods you claim you can afford to buy twice as much of. I don't want YOUR children eating high fructose corn syrup and poisoned animals loaded with antibiotics. pesticides, and hormones. Aside from the fact that it's impairing their physical, and to even more of an extent, their mental capacity, you're demanding that monsanto and other such agricultural giants keep right along making billions exploiting all of us and the earth. If your children eat the toxins they grow up acclimated to such things as normal, and end up being consumers with an appetite for nonsustianble resources, further taxing our planet's dwindling supplies of essentials. Feed your families natural organic foods that are untampered with, and you will be able to reduce your actual physical consumption of mass amounts of food because of the "nutrient density". I eat about 1/4 to 1/2 the amount of organic natural non chemical and non polluted foods than i'd need to feel like i wasn't empty if i were to eat all the poison stuff, and i'm healthier than you. I'd guarantee i'm healthier than you, you could be an athlete for all i know, but so am i in top physical and mental shape.

I used to be 380lbs when i was eating the stuff that you all consider "food" but now i'm a rock solid 180lbs with the agility of a ninja and the ability to traverse rocky mountaintops with the grace of a mountain goat.

Back then, my excuse was that i just didn't know better, but as it was brought to my attention, i promptly took immediate corrective action and stopped ingesting crap. So am I a nutcase because i vehemently adhere to my beliefs without giving in?

I don't think i'm any "better" than you, it's just that most people are miseducated when it comes to the issues at hand, and don't have a clue what the big words on the ingredient labels mean if they even bother to read them, and take any responsibility for what you put in your and your family's bodies. Your children DEPEND on you to nourish them both physically and mentally/spiritually as they have ABSOLUTELY NO WAY to know what to ask for or question what HFCS does to the liver as it breaks down. Do you tell your children before they drink a soda that it contains toxic substances that result in internal tissue degradation? Are they informed? Then no, you're responsible for poisoning the children that DEPEND on you for guidenace. In return, we're all going to have to DEPEND on a new generation of slackers that have been taught the values of not caring what goes into the body temple, nor care about anything but the pinnacle of convenience and "savings".

Pay a bit more for organic foods and it'll GREATLY offset the cost of the medical bills you'll spend trying to correct the chemical imbalance caused illnesses and disease that you'll pay a doctor to try and cover up with expensive pharmaceuticals.

I DO MY PART, how about you?


I'm no better, I'm just not voluntarily blind to gross injustice, like the gross injustice being discussed here as a corporate entity that has an economy that is oftentimes greater than the so called soverign nations which they have purchased through NAFTA and enslaved the lower class attempts to exploit one severely disabled woman and keep another family of non-important common proletariat pawns in economic slavery, impoverished, with little hope of their children having an equal chance of success in this world as the children of the elite, the upper class, and even of those who are able minded and bodied.

It's truly sickening and horrifying. Your actions as consumers are directly responsible, YOU are the ones responsible for this situation if you support the system that uses injustice to exploit. Every time you buy some 3rd world piece of plastic crap you demand that impoverished people are exploited for sweat equity so that the rich can get richer. Poverty is death, the impoverished have just as loud of a voice as the dead and buried, they have no say in policy, no economic leverage, and are at the will of the deciders. If the impoverished used the only means left to fix things, they'd be going against directed energy weapons with the pitchforks and torches in the war.

Many people are so illiterate that they can't even fire words as weapons in this war, and are left with no choice but to be complacent, imprisoned, or dead because those with the power are kept in a state of convenient false comfort, hurrying around to squeeze 60 hours of "keep busy" work into a week, while still having time to raise a family with righteous values of justice, freedom, and equality. Oh yeah, and in between this trying to survive you need time to inspect your own soul.



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 04:49 PM
link   
I was in an accident a few years ago in which I was seriously injured. When I was asked which hospital I wanted to go to, I picked the hospital with which I had medical coverage.

When in the examination room a hospital representative asked me who was going to pay the bill, I was shocked. I said that my health plan was supposed to cover me.

It's not that simple. When you have coverage and there's a chance of a lawsuit, the health care plan is going to want a piece of the pie.

Basically, I thought that the health care plan that I dutifully paid for wouldn't need to be reimbursed.

There's a word for it, but I can't remember it now.

As it turned out, my attorney sued for enough to pay my medical bills, pay her for her time (she got one third of the settlement), and give me a nice compensation.

If you ask me, it's the attorneys who should be criticized. Look at the chunk they took out of the award and they didn't do enough homework to determine whether or not WalMart would want to be reimbursed, which is the norm and not the exception.



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 05:02 PM
link   
I have a legal question in mind as I read about Debbie Shanks' case that I thought I'd throw in here...

Could Wal-Mart even enter a suit against a person who could, for all intents and purposes of Wal-Mart's claim, be legally deemed as 'mentally incapable' arising from her permanent memory loss from her accident?

If it's an ethical point that can be upheld in criminal law, and there have been many cases where the defendant has been cited as 'mentally unfit to stand trial' then surely it would also apply to civil law?



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 05:15 PM
link   
That wouldn't hold up, I think.

Someone is responsible for those funds, which is probably the woman's husband.

As I said, this woman is not being singled out. This is the way it works.

It came as a surprise to me and it came as a surprise to them.

They paid their attorney's to protect them and they are left with an empty sack.

WalMart haters will find much satisfaction in these circumstances, but WalMart is not at fault, based on my experience.



posted on Mar, 31 2008 @ 05:34 PM
link   
Forget Walmart. Their part in this story is irrelevant. Did no one see the real problem? The family won a one million dollars lawsuit against the trucking company responsible. After legal fees were paid the family received $417,000. So the lawyers took $583,000. If there is something that needs overhauled in the US it is how attorney fees are paid in large judgments.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join