Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (13434)	2/17/2010 4:43:53 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

How about we call it "tort regulation" instead of "tort reform". We could, but that implies that regulation by the government of the private sector is being increased, when most likely it is being decreased. Thinking of "regulation" vs "reform", all the bills that got any serious recent consideration on the health care "reform" effort all greatly increased regulation of the private sector. How about we call them "Health care insurance regulation", and drop "reform". Under the proposed "tort regulation", that would be limited by legislative fiat. Again the courts are the state as much as the legislature. The judge or the jury giving out the reward are not acting as private sector agents. The reward itself is government intervention, and in a very broad sense, "regulation". Limiting such rewards isn't taking away individual's freedom, because judges and juries are not acting as individuals, but as part of the state.