Man bites dog. Water flows uphill. George W. Bush vetoes some pork. Hungry children wait patiently for the insurance salesman to leave. And the latest: A jury—in New Jersey no less—gets it right.
No, really. Merck has just been vindicated completely in the second Vioxx case, without nuance, qualification, or conditional subparagraphs attendant upon article A, clause 4, section f(ii), subsection d(5)(j)(14)(b). And so at least for today, America will not take from the children and give to the lawyers.
4 comments:
Oh, you were just giving an example of something improbable. What a disappointment!
I think the Merck case is fabulous, though. I'm glad that one is for real. The trial lawyer redistribution system (i.e. our courts of civil justice) has been broken for quite a while. Good to see it works on occasion.
Trial lawyers are making their bucks merely by finding a way to get the government to use their monopoly of coercive force to extract dollars from person A and give them to person B (after taking 40%). That's not capitalism. That's vicious lobbying.
I'd be more than happy to see the government engage in appropriate law enforcement v. corporations or anyone else. I just don't like the bounty hunter/massive forced wealth transfer model.
You're missing my point, Connie. These are massive wealth transfers without anybody voting on anything. Just independent contractors convincing juries to take from one party and give to another, often well beyond any reasonable scope.
Post a Comment