N002208
Tuesday, January 22, 2002 8:35 AM
compensation fund
Dear Person,
First, I do not support this fund at all. I understand it exists primarily
to shelter the airlines from litigation. As such, it has now created a huge
new social problem. If nothing else, witness the greedy whining and puling
of the prospective benefactors. Does this signal that we Americans no
longer have to plan for the future, including catastrophe, because the USG
will be there to care for us? I hope not!
If you insist on doing this, the idea of allocating payouts based upon
projected earnings is repugnant!! How can the govt use such a horribly
distorted view of the value of human life in a charity action?? You folks
are thinking like lawyers and not like Americans. I suppose this is the
nasty link to the airline litigation issue coming to the surface. I can
understand insurance offsets and such, but projected earning is disgusting.
Give 'em all the same base amount - if you give at all.
Where does this precedent end? Is the federal government now prepared to
run some sort of charity program in each new catastrophe? If so, since you
are using MY MONEY, why should I give to the real charities since you will
now be thinking for me in these cases?
And what is the threshold for the next "catastrophe"? Can I get a payout if
I am killed in a highway crash, or a non-terrorist airplane crash, or in any
aspect of government service (even as a contractor)? You have opened
Pandora's Box.
And finally, if you don't think I understand this program, IT'S YOUR FAULT.
This has sneaked into our consciousness without much real debate. I
understand the desire to help these folks, but this is a poorly conceived
program. Spend MY money on the troops fighting the war, not the greedy
"victims" fighting each other.
Individual Comment
California, MD