param

Wait so Super Mario Bros is factually historical?

Your own link [1] says "Ob/Gyn about $30,000- $35,000". The OP said "an Ob's ins CAN COST 71k a year" [emphasis mine] so doesn't sound 'flat out wrong' to me.

Next - could you explain why you are bringing in malpractice CLAIMS data in a conversation about PREMIUMS?

Helpful tip for founders: India has a ton of diaspora abroad and is always looking for a deal to send money back home

I was always iffy about LASIK and got it done to appease my wife & I can tell you it was way simpler than I was imagining.

I can't even put contact lenses in my eye myself, but getting operated was a breeze. I have been glasses free for 8 yrs now - its great!

And do we know why this disparity exists?

Trust in government ops is valuable for success of democracy

I think they are allowing you to sell, not buy

Here is the best argument in favor of the change: >> if the rule had kicked in, some two-thirds of borrowers wouldn't qualify for a payday loan

If the above is true (and not fake news), I would like to understand how the industry was expected to survive with 2/3rd of its customer base taken away in an instant; and what alternative services these customers would have been routed to...

Not my words.

Did I induce cognitive dissonance in you?

Yep, it doesn't go far enough - even if all countries did everything in the accord we wouldn't change anything.

If this was a business setting, a proposal like this would be laughed out of existence. Somehow, when it is a Dem/progressive policy people still take it seriously.

A couple of thoughts come to mind when I read this paragraph:

1. If there is meat in her story, I am sure there are multiple lawyers who will be willing to work for a share of the settlement - i.e. she never pays out of pocket.

2. It seems we have a society where the "plaintiff" is wronged bad enough to go to court, but is wronged enough to complain about it and have society decide and punish on her behalf! Even when society doesn't know enough about the case.

This reminds me of the doctor who shot that lion in africa... society punished him really really bad - he lost patients, lost ability to work, and what not. Later, it turned out he had done everything by the book, and is not slated to be punished/held accountable either in US or zimbabwe. Same thing here... idiots on the internet feel they KNOW uber is wrong, and they are willing to punish the company by #deleteuber, and willing to go on a downvote spree towards people like me on online forums.

What happens if 6 months later it turns out Susan was lying? Will all of you come back to upvote me?

Point taken. That's why I am here to sort of point out a counter argument to DHH. He seems to be calling for consumer activism without making a serious case (at least for me) so as to WHY.

There have been allegations of misconduct, fine. Latest there is a sexual harassment claim... Those are VERY attractive to certain class of lawyers. Why not let law take its course? Why do WE, who know nothing of what happened, have to PRE-JUDGE and punish the company upfront?

Again, lets keep subjective opinions out of the picture for a second.

Specifically, In Uber's case, tell me what they did that SHOULD be illegal and we can talk about it.