Talk:Corporate manslaughter

message: I d0 not understand how to submit this material, but I have oracticed commercial law from all sided including as a white collar prosecutor and a member of the Florida legislature.    The idea of compensation, setting aside pain and suffering for a minute, which is rarely availanle.      A corporation has no incentive to follow the law at all.   Damages are strictly limited to what a plaintiff can prove it would have earned haf the corporation acted properly in the first place.  so, the worst that can happen in 5the current system is tat if a person can hire investigators, experts and and a law firm,  which is highly unlikely, then the most the plaintiff can feceive is just ebough and no more than if the company had  not sc rewed him.   Florida had an excellent deterent  in chapter 812 called Civil Theft enacted at the zenieth of public concern under Carter following Watergate.   The Florida courts moved quickly to eviserate it and the busibess dominated legislature since elected will not even consider a corrective bill.
Their is a concept of fraid, but commercial fraud is virtually non existence because of out of date 'economic damages concepts' that limit b usibess famages to contractual damages which hve ne ver recognized any concept greater than restoring a party to the poaition it would have enjoyed had their been bo lying or cheating.
Lawyers havge to insist on prepayment by an injured party   beuase there are so many obstacles and years of waiting for compensation under the best of circumstances.  and a client that looses is ysyally bankrupt in any case thus bankrupting the law firm.
and the recovery of attorneys frees is so rare as to be a non issue. as far as enforcing any tyoe of ethical behavior.
what more their are no ethical standards that can be enforced in court. 
I'm a terrible typist.
Now there was an excellent point made  about the rush to the bottom.    simply   this, because we are not going to fix this all business is in a rac e to the bottom.   A firm wishing to be etical will face share holder suits and in carry ing the costs of being ethical the ethical company is disadvantaged by a drain on resources not faced by the ethically challlenged who are better at hiding
once a corrupt intension has given the corrupt operators they can quickly turn legitimate having secured the unfair advantage.   the dirty work can easlily be disclaimed throu  out side consultants.   if the  corruption is successful and concealed  the honest will never know.  if it is revealed the dominate players will disclaim all responsivility by saying   the company never authorizdd corrupt practices  and thus should not ne held responsible for rogue operatprs.
but peal back the curtain and you see webs od secret deals that are protected by  valid none disclosure agreements   And   while  the  public relation department  will tout  their ethical policies the   firm will have layers of managers with instructions to either ' win' for the company   or find other emploument.
the wall of silence is perpetuated because it takes years to learn  a vusiness  and  the ways to profit.  having invested thir lives in mastering a system, sa6y like the internal revenue code,    the reformers will find virually no support among the initiated to change a system only they know.    consider for a momemt the   case of the 1700 years in which the Bible was controlled by lovers of the dead Latin language.    Reform came only when the archaic text  could be commonly interpreted.    I'm not pockinh on the Church   or faith just giving a well known example of the initiated controlling the discussion successfully for centuries.     that's enough for today.      sorry that i do not have the time to foot note this properly.   that will take  a few years at lrast.   Maybe you could help.
Mark.
thanks— Preceding unsigned comment added by Disland (talk • contribs)   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abu Asda (talk • contribs) 07:49, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism