- 02 Apr 2023 08:21
#15270232
This is an issue that a lot of those on the Left, probably the majority of people in society, are too dumb and stupid to be able to think about correctly.
A family is suing the company Amazon because an Amazon driver accidentally hit a 2-year-old girl, causing the child's death.
Those on the Left look at this in glee as a type of situation to take money from a big corporation.
But here's the thing: Should Amazon actually be responsible for this accident?
Should an employer who hires someone else to drive automatically be responsible if that person, while doing their job, accidentally runs someone over and injures them?
Why shouldn't that person themselves be held responsible?
And do we take more money from bigger companies than small companies, for the same accident?
If so, that could easily bankrupt a small business.
Do you want to force all employers to have to buy accident insurance to cover their employees?
You do realize those costs are going to be passed down to the customer, right? It's just going to result in higher prices. YOU are going to be the one paying for it.
You'd have to be a stupid dolt not to realize that!
It's a tragic accident. But, why should the family get ANY money?
(I could maybe see some money for burial expenses, but beyond that...)
And if you want to "punish" the company, what exactly are they being punished for?
Shouldn't the person actually driving the car be the one who is punished?
Money is not going to even be able to put the situation right or make the situation better.
But it gets more interesting than that. Because apparently Amazon foresaw this type of situation might happen and had a plan to avoid liability. Amazon contracted with a separate third-party company to employ its drivers. Meaning, Amazon is not actually the company directly employing the drivers. Instead of a gigantic company being the employer, you have a relatively small and more local contracting company - a company that's not worth much money and could easily be shut down, go bankrupt, and be restarted up all over again, under a different company name.
That just demonstrates how STUPID and absurd the idea is many people have of wanting to hold the company responsible.
Family Is Suing Amazon After Driver Hit and Killed Their 2-Year-Old (insider.com)
https://www.insider.com/family-is-suing ... old-2023-4
You just know they want to scare big companies into a settlement.
"Pay me $700,000 or I'll sue you for $3 million, and then there's a good chance you might actually have to pay it."
Pretty much just forces the company to pay the settlement because that's the cheaper and less risky thing to do, when they know there's a high chance the courts would award money to the family.
A family is suing the company Amazon because an Amazon driver accidentally hit a 2-year-old girl, causing the child's death.
Those on the Left look at this in glee as a type of situation to take money from a big corporation.
But here's the thing: Should Amazon actually be responsible for this accident?
Should an employer who hires someone else to drive automatically be responsible if that person, while doing their job, accidentally runs someone over and injures them?
Why shouldn't that person themselves be held responsible?
And do we take more money from bigger companies than small companies, for the same accident?
If so, that could easily bankrupt a small business.
Do you want to force all employers to have to buy accident insurance to cover their employees?
You do realize those costs are going to be passed down to the customer, right? It's just going to result in higher prices. YOU are going to be the one paying for it.
You'd have to be a stupid dolt not to realize that!
It's a tragic accident. But, why should the family get ANY money?
(I could maybe see some money for burial expenses, but beyond that...)
And if you want to "punish" the company, what exactly are they being punished for?
Shouldn't the person actually driving the car be the one who is punished?
Money is not going to even be able to put the situation right or make the situation better.
But it gets more interesting than that. Because apparently Amazon foresaw this type of situation might happen and had a plan to avoid liability. Amazon contracted with a separate third-party company to employ its drivers. Meaning, Amazon is not actually the company directly employing the drivers. Instead of a gigantic company being the employer, you have a relatively small and more local contracting company - a company that's not worth much money and could easily be shut down, go bankrupt, and be restarted up all over again, under a different company name.
That just demonstrates how STUPID and absurd the idea is many people have of wanting to hold the company responsible.
Family Is Suing Amazon After Driver Hit and Killed Their 2-Year-Old (insider.com)
https://www.insider.com/family-is-suing ... old-2023-4
You just know they want to scare big companies into a settlement.
"Pay me $700,000 or I'll sue you for $3 million, and then there's a good chance you might actually have to pay it."
Pretty much just forces the company to pay the settlement because that's the cheaper and less risky thing to do, when they know there's a high chance the courts would award money to the family.
- By Unthinking Majority
- By Fasces
- By Pants-of-dog
- By paeng