• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Kapton

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #11
    Originally posted by expat View Post
    Cost-benefit analysis.

    The wrong decision is fixable. Ford did the same with the Pinto US car: they realised that a poor design in the fuel tank would allow rear-end crashes to cause fatal fires. The design fault was easily fixable with an extra protective collar, but the recall would be expensive. Ford calculated that it would be cheaper just to pay out on the lawsuits from victims' families.

    When this was revealed, people got so angry at Ford's callous disregard for life that juries started making huge awards (one was $125 million), so Ford's cost-benefit calculation shifted a bit.
    If memory is right, it didn't come out until the first trial, though there had been allegedly a lot of stonewalling around disclosure. I beleive the initial punitive damages were well in excess of $125 mln and Ralph Nader was plaintiff counsel. Prompted the book unsafe at any speed - but I could be talking complete ballcocks and that might have been the Corvair.

    Comment


      #12
      Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
      Just a reminder. Don't fly on an Airbus !!
      Based on a total load of arse as usual. Your lack of knowledge of aviation is matched only by your lack of any knowledge of Tory party policy - of course you don't need to know about any Tory policies as you will vote Tory without any consideration of policy issues.

      Comment


        #13
        Originally posted by Peoplesoft bloke View Post
        Based on a total load of arse as usual. Your lack of knowledge of aviation is matched only by your lack of any knowledge of Tory party policy - of course you don't need to know about any Tory policies as you will vote Tory without any consideration of policy issues.


        The abolition of HIPS, shutting of our borders, and cutting out spin, lies and deceit will do me. Come on you Tories !!!

        Comment


          #14
          Originally posted by ASB View Post
          If memory is right, it didn't come out until the first trial, though there had been allegedly a lot of stonewalling around disclosure. I beleive the initial punitive damages were well in excess of $125 mln and Ralph Nader was plaintiff counsel. Prompted the book unsafe at any speed - but I could be talking complete ballcocks and that might have been the Corvair.
          http://www.pointoflaw.com/articles/T...Pinto_Case.pdf

          Comment


            #15
            Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
            The abolition of HIPS, shutting of our borders, and cutting out spin, lies and deceit will do me. Come on you Tories !!!
            As I said, you don't have any idea - the Tories are not promising the "shutting our borders" nor could they. As for lies spin and deceit - what a laugh.

            Comment


              #16
              Originally posted by Peoplesoft bloke View Post
              As I said, you don't have any idea - the Tories are not promising the "shutting our borders" nor could they. As for lies spin and deceit - what a laugh.

              Yep, the Tories will reduce immigration drastically, where Labour have abjectly failed more by design than incompetence IMO.

              Comment


                #17
                Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
                Yep, the Tories will reduce immigration drastically, where Labour have abjectly failed more by design than incompetence IMO.
                So not shutting the borders then. At least you admit that was bollocks - progress of a sort. OK - a little quiz - who was it who abolished exit controls, thereby removing a valuable guide to who was still here?

                Comment


                  #18
                  Originally posted by ASB View Post
                  If memory is right, it didn't come out until the first trial, though there had been allegedly a lot of stonewalling around disclosure. I beleive the initial punitive damages were well in excess of $125 mln and Ralph Nader was plaintiff counsel. Prompted the book unsafe at any speed - but I could be talking complete ballcocks and that might have been the Corvair.
                  No. Not complete

                  Unsafe At Any Speed was much earlier, it was what made Nader's name, and it was about the VW Beetle.

                  The damages were $125m but the amount was reduced on appeal. However the new amounts ($4m + $3m punitive damages or something like that) were still enough to tip the balance in Ford's arithmetic, and the original award left them scared.

                  Comment


                    #19
                    Originally posted by zeitghost
                    It was about the Corvair... though the then current model of the Beetle shared the same interesting handling foible...

                    I've read the book.
                    Indeed - the Corvair was Chevy's attempt to create a US Beetle - it wasn't that bad a car but a lot of Septics are totally hopeless drivers.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X