They sure did. They enslaved entire nations, killing those who objected, promoted massive opium addiction in China and went to war more than once to maintain their position as drug dealers to the masses. They practiced genocide on a massive scale, invented and ran the first concetration camps during the so-called 1st Boer war, condemned children of the “lower orders” in their own country to lives of slavery and used their ill-gotten gains to paint themselves as the saviours of man-kind, pioneers, inventors and all round good guys. Their powerful propaganda is still working. Leo & Co would be proud of them.
Personal responsibility.
- Thread starter Purple
- Start date
There’s a case currently before the courts where a nurse having used the toilet facilities in a night club set fire to herself by using an aerosol she found beside the wash-hand basins. There was a lighted candle in the vacinity and her hair promptly burst into flames, injuring her and resulting in 7 weeks off work.
Personal responsibility? Intoxicated in the presence of fire? Too pissed or stupid to realise that aerosols generally turn into flame-throwers in the presence of a naked flame? Night club management, lighted candles and locked patrons together in same confined space?
Maybe they all deserve each other, but stop increasing my insurance premiums because of your joint stupidity.
Personal responsibility? Intoxicated in the presence of fire? Too pissed or stupid to realise that aerosols generally turn into flame-throwers in the presence of a naked flame? Night club management, lighted candles and locked patrons together in same confined space?
Maybe they all deserve each other, but stop increasing my insurance premiums because of your joint stupidity.
I think that is a little bit harsh. Accidents do happen, people make mistakes and that is the point of having insurance in the first place. Most people know that spray deodorants are flammable, but they also know that it will take s heavy concentration of the spray to ignite with the flame.
Im guessing this was freakish, but admittedly im speculating.
The problem I think is that the awards attributed to injuries, in particular soft, easily healable injuries are extravagant.
But who sets these rates? How are these awards calculated. Is it the claimant? Do 12yr old girls and their mammies bully the solicitors and insurance companies to pay out €85,000 for what on the face of it, was a minor but distressing scalding?
Here is a blog from claims.ie
Insurers not Telling the Full Story | Claims Ireland
Online portal of information on claims with online public case assessment service.
claims.ie
I think this too.
However when some people get huge financial advantage on flimsy or no grounds, the system becomes something to be exploited rather than just a safety net.
And when the rewards can be so huge, otherwise responsible people can be tempted into irresponsibility.
There can hardly be a clearer instance of exploiting the system that the Ronan Ryan house situation.
How many others will think if he can do that why can't I.
Im not overly familiar with the case other than it is a case to try and hold onto a property, as distinct from others making fraudulent insurance claims.
I have no doubt that there are plenty of people who try exploit, manipulate the rules or simply try to defraud the system if they see an opportunity.
But I also consider that many people have genuine grievances, genuine claims to make, or have a genuine objectives in protecting their own interests.
I understand the disdain at people who make fraudulent claims, but there also appears to be disdain afforded to people who are simply protecting their own interests. See post #6
I made an insurance claim once before against Dublin Bus. A bus pulled out of a lane and took the front left side of my car off.
I made a claim, because I was entitled to, because I have a right to, and sure enough, Dublin Bus admitted liability and paid for damage and repairs to my car.
I also had to visit a hospital consultant. Who charged me €120. My insurance, that I pay for, entitles me to claim €60 of this cost back. It is my right to claim this back. So I did.
And for the most part, outside of fraudulent claims, that is all that people are doing - protecting their interests as is their right and entitlement to do so.
The fact that the compensation system appears to award extravagant payouts to claimants is not the fault of the claimants. If they can prove liability, they are entitled to seek redress.
Overall, with regard to the OP and in my opinion, everything suggests that people in general do take personal responsibility for their actions. Taking out insurance policies, on your house, your car, your mortgage, your health etc is a sign of that.
I think you are right and this is a very important point.
It is the legal system and the legal professionals who design and profit from the current situation.
The extravagant payouts attract people hoping to net a payout for themselves and the lawyers, and consultants who advise them.
Then prosecute the publican but don’t allow the drunk idiot to sue them.
My point is that this unfortunate incident wasn't an accident, it was a stupid. It's a moot point who was more stupid, but an accident it wasn't.
You're preaching to the converted where I'm concerned, but when was the last time you heard of a prosecution for breaching this important condition in a liquor licence? Or maybe when was the *first* time?
When will the majority in this country come to the recognition that we drink alcohol primarily for its mind and mood-altering capabilities and not for taste, aroma, bouquet, nose or any other attribute? "Socialising" generally means getting pissed and filling the drinks companies' coffers.
elacsaplau
Registered User
- Messages
- 892
Peanuts,
In fairness the damage caused was due, in large part, to the ellipsoidal nature of the ball. Clearly time to switch to the roundy ball - at least for all games where observers are present!
In fairness the damage caused was due, in large part, to the ellipsoidal nature of the ball. Clearly time to switch to the roundy ball - at least for all games where observers are present!
Is the responsibility of the local council to put up warning signs against sunburn at local beaches?
Your children should not suffer unduly on the basis of you not willing to take up gainful employment.
Zero minus your legal costs.
You better change your attitude or I'll sue you as well get mental trauma!
Are you saying I should take responsibility for my own actions?
Our increasingly socially Left (rather than Liberal) society is more about rights than values and responsibilities. Rights suggest what you can do but not what you should do.
I would disagree somewhat. Apart from spurious claims of deflated footballs being the cause of broken wrists or multi injury claims for a car crash that never occurred, invoking rights is generally a positive and in the round drives standards.
Personal responsibility to the self is one thing, but we all have a personal responsibility to act in a collective purpose with everyone else.
Disabled toilets for instance. Any public access establishment built in last 25yrs will most likely have access to disabled toilets. I have rarely, if ever, seen a disabled person use the toilets (not that I am actively monitoring). That said, the proportion of people with disabilities that would require toilet access relative to abled bodied persons is tiny which may explain this.
But in the event of a disabled person requiring the need to access, invoking the rights of such persons to have that access has driven standards in our society to provide such access. So much so, that many disabled toilets now double as a baby-changing room, providing parents with toddlers convenient access in what would otherwise be an uncomfortable situation. Its drives standards
Settlements made for scaldings suffered by a child in cafe, or on a flight, should drive those industries to introduce higher standards that will hopefully minimize greatly the prospect of such events occurring again.
Invoking rights is important. The collective responsibility for the settlement and calculation of monetary awards made for injury is primarily, I would imagine, between the insurance industry, the legal profession and the legislators.
If settlements and awards are inducing more and more people to make spurious claims, then those responsible for the oversight and implementation of the system need to take responsibility for their (in)actions.