- This topic has 255 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 10 months ago by DaCounselor.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 4, 2008 at 6:57 PM #129754January 4, 2008 at 7:11 PM #129486nostradamusParticipant
I know you like an open blog. I even know which panties you wear. }:P
My point is, where does it stop? To put a label on a well-known beverage like coffee which has been yummily served steaming hot for centuries is the equivalent of labeling fries as “fried” or a milkshake with “contains milk”. How stupid do we have to accommodate?
Billion-dollar corporations don’t become that way by spending money putting labels like “this is a fork” on a fork or by paying the medical bills of everyone who files a frivolous lawsuit. To become that successful a business must do two things (here’s the secret Donald Trump won’t tell you, are you ready?): 1. minimize overhead 2. maximize profit margins
All the labeling and medical bill paying will contradict rule #1. IMO the only reason Stella won her lawsuit is the “stick it to the rich corporations” mentality that the lawyers successfully recognized during jury selection.
I’ve been on a jury and all I can say is… WOW. You get all kinds out there.
January 4, 2008 at 7:11 PM #129655nostradamusParticipantI know you like an open blog. I even know which panties you wear. }:P
My point is, where does it stop? To put a label on a well-known beverage like coffee which has been yummily served steaming hot for centuries is the equivalent of labeling fries as “fried” or a milkshake with “contains milk”. How stupid do we have to accommodate?
Billion-dollar corporations don’t become that way by spending money putting labels like “this is a fork” on a fork or by paying the medical bills of everyone who files a frivolous lawsuit. To become that successful a business must do two things (here’s the secret Donald Trump won’t tell you, are you ready?): 1. minimize overhead 2. maximize profit margins
All the labeling and medical bill paying will contradict rule #1. IMO the only reason Stella won her lawsuit is the “stick it to the rich corporations” mentality that the lawyers successfully recognized during jury selection.
I’ve been on a jury and all I can say is… WOW. You get all kinds out there.
January 4, 2008 at 7:11 PM #129662nostradamusParticipantI know you like an open blog. I even know which panties you wear. }:P
My point is, where does it stop? To put a label on a well-known beverage like coffee which has been yummily served steaming hot for centuries is the equivalent of labeling fries as “fried” or a milkshake with “contains milk”. How stupid do we have to accommodate?
Billion-dollar corporations don’t become that way by spending money putting labels like “this is a fork” on a fork or by paying the medical bills of everyone who files a frivolous lawsuit. To become that successful a business must do two things (here’s the secret Donald Trump won’t tell you, are you ready?): 1. minimize overhead 2. maximize profit margins
All the labeling and medical bill paying will contradict rule #1. IMO the only reason Stella won her lawsuit is the “stick it to the rich corporations” mentality that the lawyers successfully recognized during jury selection.
I’ve been on a jury and all I can say is… WOW. You get all kinds out there.
January 4, 2008 at 7:11 PM #129728nostradamusParticipantI know you like an open blog. I even know which panties you wear. }:P
My point is, where does it stop? To put a label on a well-known beverage like coffee which has been yummily served steaming hot for centuries is the equivalent of labeling fries as “fried” or a milkshake with “contains milk”. How stupid do we have to accommodate?
Billion-dollar corporations don’t become that way by spending money putting labels like “this is a fork” on a fork or by paying the medical bills of everyone who files a frivolous lawsuit. To become that successful a business must do two things (here’s the secret Donald Trump won’t tell you, are you ready?): 1. minimize overhead 2. maximize profit margins
All the labeling and medical bill paying will contradict rule #1. IMO the only reason Stella won her lawsuit is the “stick it to the rich corporations” mentality that the lawyers successfully recognized during jury selection.
I’ve been on a jury and all I can say is… WOW. You get all kinds out there.
January 4, 2008 at 7:11 PM #129759nostradamusParticipantI know you like an open blog. I even know which panties you wear. }:P
My point is, where does it stop? To put a label on a well-known beverage like coffee which has been yummily served steaming hot for centuries is the equivalent of labeling fries as “fried” or a milkshake with “contains milk”. How stupid do we have to accommodate?
Billion-dollar corporations don’t become that way by spending money putting labels like “this is a fork” on a fork or by paying the medical bills of everyone who files a frivolous lawsuit. To become that successful a business must do two things (here’s the secret Donald Trump won’t tell you, are you ready?): 1. minimize overhead 2. maximize profit margins
All the labeling and medical bill paying will contradict rule #1. IMO the only reason Stella won her lawsuit is the “stick it to the rich corporations” mentality that the lawyers successfully recognized during jury selection.
I’ve been on a jury and all I can say is… WOW. You get all kinds out there.
January 4, 2008 at 7:13 PM #129491nostradamusParticipantDang, now I gotta run out for fries and a milkshake… see you later!
January 4, 2008 at 7:13 PM #129660nostradamusParticipantDang, now I gotta run out for fries and a milkshake… see you later!
January 4, 2008 at 7:13 PM #129667nostradamusParticipantDang, now I gotta run out for fries and a milkshake… see you later!
January 4, 2008 at 7:13 PM #129733nostradamusParticipantDang, now I gotta run out for fries and a milkshake… see you later!
January 4, 2008 at 7:13 PM #129764nostradamusParticipantDang, now I gotta run out for fries and a milkshake… see you later!
January 4, 2008 at 7:56 PM #129511equalizerParticipantHow about using a plastic reusable mug (sell to customer for cheap) for the drive through instead of a paper cup for 180+ coffee? Simple, cost-effective, eco-friendly, everyone wins except lawyers.
Did you read the part where MDs paid 230,000 to person who suffered burns as a result of an employee spilled the coffee in her car? We are not talk about a burn here. We are talking about 3rd degree burns, go check out the burn ward before you dismiss its hot coffee. Why did Mds pay that much for simple hot coffee?
Why did Mds not settle the case against the 79 year woman for 20K, 150K, 300K who had never filed a lawsuit in her life and not accepted the court mediation offer? The judge offered many chances for a sealed settlement. Looking at case facts one could surmise that they could have hoped they would lose to get lifetime of positive press. Mds won big, they should pay her at least $10M as best PR stunt in world history.
January 4, 2008 at 7:56 PM #129680equalizerParticipantHow about using a plastic reusable mug (sell to customer for cheap) for the drive through instead of a paper cup for 180+ coffee? Simple, cost-effective, eco-friendly, everyone wins except lawyers.
Did you read the part where MDs paid 230,000 to person who suffered burns as a result of an employee spilled the coffee in her car? We are not talk about a burn here. We are talking about 3rd degree burns, go check out the burn ward before you dismiss its hot coffee. Why did Mds pay that much for simple hot coffee?
Why did Mds not settle the case against the 79 year woman for 20K, 150K, 300K who had never filed a lawsuit in her life and not accepted the court mediation offer? The judge offered many chances for a sealed settlement. Looking at case facts one could surmise that they could have hoped they would lose to get lifetime of positive press. Mds won big, they should pay her at least $10M as best PR stunt in world history.
January 4, 2008 at 7:56 PM #129686equalizerParticipantHow about using a plastic reusable mug (sell to customer for cheap) for the drive through instead of a paper cup for 180+ coffee? Simple, cost-effective, eco-friendly, everyone wins except lawyers.
Did you read the part where MDs paid 230,000 to person who suffered burns as a result of an employee spilled the coffee in her car? We are not talk about a burn here. We are talking about 3rd degree burns, go check out the burn ward before you dismiss its hot coffee. Why did Mds pay that much for simple hot coffee?
Why did Mds not settle the case against the 79 year woman for 20K, 150K, 300K who had never filed a lawsuit in her life and not accepted the court mediation offer? The judge offered many chances for a sealed settlement. Looking at case facts one could surmise that they could have hoped they would lose to get lifetime of positive press. Mds won big, they should pay her at least $10M as best PR stunt in world history.
January 4, 2008 at 7:56 PM #129753equalizerParticipantHow about using a plastic reusable mug (sell to customer for cheap) for the drive through instead of a paper cup for 180+ coffee? Simple, cost-effective, eco-friendly, everyone wins except lawyers.
Did you read the part where MDs paid 230,000 to person who suffered burns as a result of an employee spilled the coffee in her car? We are not talk about a burn here. We are talking about 3rd degree burns, go check out the burn ward before you dismiss its hot coffee. Why did Mds pay that much for simple hot coffee?
Why did Mds not settle the case against the 79 year woman for 20K, 150K, 300K who had never filed a lawsuit in her life and not accepted the court mediation offer? The judge offered many chances for a sealed settlement. Looking at case facts one could surmise that they could have hoped they would lose to get lifetime of positive press. Mds won big, they should pay her at least $10M as best PR stunt in world history.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.