The Insurance Locator

People trying to survive the current economic slowdown is looking to economize on everything. Car sharing or (GASP), using the transport public to purchase generic food and luxury items to cut, people who have lost their jobs or fear losing their jobs are trying to save precious money. Unfortunately, his attempts to save run headlong into rising costs in all sectors of the economy, especially health care. Trapped between reduced income and expenses that can not be cut, finally raising a hue and cry about the astronomical price of health care in this country.

Trying to capitalize on the terror of the masses, demagogues, inspired largely by industry lobbyists have taken the banner of "tort reform" like how to reduce costs. His argument that the claims frivolous medical liability and other lawsuits malpracticepremises cost us money, about $ 3250 per year for a family of four ($ 880 per person) in accordance with a full run simultaneously on the Wall Street Journal, the Chicago Tribune and Washington Post. This cost, they say, is passed to you in the form of higher prices, which is why many people are struggling to pay for gas, food, medical care, and house payments. Moreover, they say, this cost prevents the growth of the economy, which is part of the reason that many jobs, people are being threatened. They also say that even frivolous lawsuits cost to local governments, companies and medical organizations not only in terms of settlements, but in the current cost of increased insurance rates.

However, do not be fooled. Tort reform is a new type of offer, that trickle-down economics may provide some minimal economic benefit to the average consumer, but the benefit will be dwarfed by the resulting increase in profits for businesses, and the actual costs that individuals pay through increased exposure to risk and lack of access to legal recourse when they suffer harm as a result of costs dangerous reduction methods practiced by companies such as manufacturers, health care conglomerates, and the pharmaceutical companies.

First, let us consider the arguments of civil liability reform. Note that it is about using the costs of "frivolous" claims on two occasions, which has no logical sense. Any of the companies pass on the costs to consumers, in which case firms have money and can be used to expand the business and improving facilities and hiring employees, or who do not pass the cost to us, and do not have the money to reinvest on economic growth. In other words, the cost should be divided between the two arguments, say evenly between the two at $ 440 per person in a higher cost, and $ 440 in reduced economic growth. Now let's consider the cost of "frivolous" claims in context.

Considering we pay $ 440 per year in higher costs related to the "frivolous" lawsuits, Does this constitute an undue burden on corporate America? Are frivolous lawsuits threatens to overshadow the benefits of business? Not by much less.

Corporate profits, ie take the money free and clear above all costs (including inflated the cost of the CEOs not only in terms of salary, but bonuses and expense accounts) are the equivalent of $ 4514 per year for every man, woman and child in the United States, more than ten times the cost of "frivolous" lawsuits. And if you're worried about being able to pay their bills on a salary that seems to stretch far enough, consider that corporate profits are at their highest level as a percentage of GDP since the 1960s, while the rate to pay of workers has been stable or declining, despite the continuous increase in productivity. In addition, when we had our so-called recovery from recession economy of 2001-2003, corporate profits grew at a rate three times the growth of wages. The companies were making money, but fret that workers, and this ensures that many people, offering mortgages based on the expectation that wages would rise with or above the interest rates, could not meet with loan payments.

So, Do you pay for "frivolous" lawsuits? Yes, but pales in comparison to what you pay for earnings corporate.

But what about the second argument, that economic demands stunt growth? This argument is even more complex, and we will take in Part 2. Then, in Part 3, we consider the corollary argument that states with legal systems are susceptible to abuse suffered both an economic recession and a "flight" of doctors compared to states with more favorable legal systems for companies and doctors. Finally, in the Part 4 will be considered alternate solutions to the "liability crisis" that can reduce costs even more than tort reform without restricting people's access to legal recourse, leading to a win-win situation for everyone but the insurance companies of speculation.

About the Author:

If you have suffered as a result of another’s negligence, you have a right to recourse, so contact the personal injury lawyers at the Falvello Law Firm, located in Sugarloaf, Pennsylvania, are prepared to represent you.

Article Source: ArticlesBase.com – Tort Reform: a Dangerous Catch-phrase (part 1)

Maryland Medical Malpractice Lawyers Washington DC