RE: Practice Snippets - The woman who wanted to get rid of hair on her hands
COLD HOT COFFEE LOL:
I wish I could watch the video or read a transcript of the Hot Coffee McDonald's case to see how the person won. Hypothetically, I would allow it as a judge, if I was a judge, to the extent that McDonald's said on their coffee cups and ads and everything, "HOT COFFEE IS NOT HOT, DON'T WORRY, YOU WILL NOT BURN YOURSELF, etc, etc...." Anything less than that, as a judge, I'd be tempted to dismiss the case or possibly rule against the person. Maybe McDonald's should have counter sued, assuming they didn't try. So, I wonder if that case had just a judge or if they had jurors as well.
Advertisement
Yea, generally, ads can be isolated and can be misleading. Marketing can focus on part of the story and not say everything and that is understandable to the extent that they don't say, like I said, that the hot coffee is not hot. They didn't have to say that the coffee is not but I guess they lost in a court of law and that is too bad.
Emotionalism
Yes, what you said about emotions is very true. They try to make you feel stuff and make you throw your brain out the window haha. Bye bye brain. Oh, I agree with what you are saying about sensory perception. Some of it has to do with nostalgia, familiarity, and even the simulation of addiction. Yeah, it is like poker. That is the nature of advertising, like you said. Not that it has to be to some extent but that it is the trend. Yeah, honest dishonesty, perhaps, another paradox or whatever. Yeah, it is good when you are able to free yourself. That is the key to many things. Knowledge is power.
Not a transcript but a pretty good summary and some facts. Its called the Liebeck case- what I quote here comes from the German version of the Wiki, cause I did not find it in the English version:
In Germany, it's the other way around. That let shine a total different light on that case.
Also, our system is so much different from the US social system. We have a lot more social security and when someone gets sick or disabled or cannot work either through private matters or through work related damages we have insurances (for the latter), covered by every company, which has to pay for certain insurances - most people are totally unaware of that like many other things in German law and order. I can say that with confidence as my first education was an accountant in a government health insurance. People are not ruined here when they cannot work anymore.
I now can understand better the high amounts, even though of course the extremes will remain extreme.
Yeah, knowledge is power. :)
Who said that what you have there we don't have here in the United States? Is what you have in Germany, in regards to health care, similar to what people have in Canada? Are you aware of the welfare system in America? Also, are you aware of what people did before the 1930's? I would dare you to compare now with how things were before the 1930's. That's critical to understand.
In Germany, we have had statutory social insurance for all areas since 1883. It is obligatory and prevents people from being left without insurance when they become ill. We have more than five hundred carriers of the German social insurance, far more than 100 transfer payments for all possible cases that occur, which have to do with health and employment. The carriers are public institutions and are not allowed to make profits.
If employees become ill, they are entitled to have their company continue to pay their full salary - for up to six weeks. After that, members of the statutory health insurance scheme receive sick pay from their health insurance fund for about two and a half years if they are permanently ill. This amounts to about 90 % of the net salary.
In some industries there is more than sick pay. For example, trade unions and employers in the public sector have agreed to increase sick pay. Sick employees who have been employed for at least three years receive the difference between sick pay and net wages from the employer. This applies up to a period of illness of ten months.
Mothers receive so-called maternity protection and pregnant women also receive maternity benefits six weeks before and eight weeks after giving birth. After that, there is a state parental allowance, which is paid for one year. For people who have no income, there is a minimum rate. If you cannot afford to pay your rent, you can apply for housing benefit here, and you will receive child benefit supplement for children in addition to child benefit. And so on and so on. The whole thing is not comparable to Obamacare. The USA has already had a completely different development of its social security before 2010 due to its history. In any case, there is a big difference in our legal systems.
All those who have no work or who receive too little sickness or unemployment benefit are cushioned by a nationwide social assistance system that guarantees the minimum subsistence level. In addition, there are various special benefits, such as the possibility to apply for a rent deposit from the authorities when moving to a new home. This is granted as an interest-free loan and is deducted in very small partial amounts from social welfare. You can apply for subsidies for transport costs, initial baby equipment etc. etc. etc. and in many cases you will receive these subsidies.
All parents who receive social welfare have free access to "education and participation", i.e. school meals, school trips, sports club memberships, etc. Parents do not have to pay for this. In addition, everyone who receives social welfare receives 18% cheaper tickets for public transport. The fees that the German state charges for media are completely waived.
I have now made only an incomplete list, which does not include a specific rating. One can of course discuss the pros and cons. But that would go too far here.
I am more than sure that our system is very different from the US system. Despite Obama Care, there is simply the different history. I don't know what you are talking about, what do you mean by the 30s?