Re: Re: Social Security/looking good

January 7, 2007

" You look good " is code for " you're not dead yet, so you don't deserve any

compensation "

And even if you are dead, its very difficult to get a lawyer.. : /

That's the way they work.. Are you surprised?

On 1/6/07, iluvbunnies5262 <iluvbunnies5262@...> wrote:

>

> I hear that crap all the time too " Well You Look Good " like that is

> suppose to make all the damage and crap we go thru daily go away.

> Like said below, people can look good in the coffin!! That statement

> makes me want to slap them in a mold hole! Rhonda

>

> > >

> > > All I can say that is you can't tell a heart patient by how he

> looks

> > > except maybe if they are obese and you can assume they have

> diabetes,

> > > etc. Or you can't tell if a cancer patient has cancer unless he

> is

> > > bald. Even my grandmother looked pretty good in her casket so

> looks

> > > tell nothing. I look pretty good but that is because I care

> about

> > > what I eat and exercise and do everything possible to stay clean

> of

> > > chemicals, etc. Good luck with getting the ss. I do know you are

> > > usually turned the first time but they have to pay back time from

> the

> > > time you filed.

> > >

> >

>

January 8, 2007

And yet there are thousands, tens of thousands, abusing the system.

Go figure. Looks like I am going to have to start all over, and spend

$$$$ on specialist's if I want to get on it. No lawyer's I talked to

will even do the civil action thing. Not with the difficulty in

establishing my eligibility and for what? A mere chance to get a

piece of a puny ssi payout.

I just hope that when I get my camper done I can work again. This

looks like my best hope.

Sat, 6 Jan 2007 22:37:59 -0500, you wrote:

> " You look good " is code for " you're not dead yet, so you don't deserve any

>compensation "

>

>And even if you are dead, its very difficult to get a lawyer.. : /

>

>That's the way they work.. Are you surprised?

January 8, 2007

I don't think anyone should depend on the government for help in these

situations, now. They don't see it as their mission, because we are all

still laboring under illusions that were valid in the middle of the last

century but which are not valid now.

For one thing, permanent jobs are being replaced by temporary jobs based on

projects. And we also need to understand that as (global, multinational)

industry needs workers less, at least workers here in the US, the natural

tendancy will be for wages to fall and benefits to cease.

Its supply and demand. That's the way the free market system works.

If we want to institute a better safety net here in the US, we need to do it

through the ballot box and activism. But industry won't stop shifting jobs

overseas and automating them. That's a given.

People who have been injured, however, have a VERY LEGITIMATE claim to

compensation. People with skills who can't use them anymore even if they are

in demand have legitimate claims against those who injured them.

People who are sick because of environmental toxins also should band

together and form an association to push for some kind of compensation,

because they can't work in normal work situations either. And that

compensation should be much higher than social security because they were

injured through no fault of their own. In a sense, they are the collateral

damage caused by our leaders deliberate folly in not protecting people

better.

January 9, 2007

I am actually for the responsible use of chemicals. They have made

life so much better for so many people I would never want to stifle

the progress we made or have the industry shift over to third world

country's which will be even more irresponsible with them. I just want

responsibility. When someone doesn't follow the guidelines with

pesticides and someone get's hurt as a result there should be swift

accountability process for all party's involved. It should be

understood exactly what happened, what the consequences were and for

who, and a plan to avoid a future mishap of the same type. I have to

laugh when you here PCO'S talk about professionalism.

Professionalism?? What a joke. How can you have professionalism when

their is an entire segment of society made sick by this industry and

instead of recognizing this fact and rectifying it so more people

don't get injured they pay people off to cover it up and wink and nod.

God only knows what all of the lawn chemicals are doing to our ground

water. I am totally against this unnecessary destruction of our

environment. Same goes for pesticides indoors. These company's know

there are plenty of better ways that will not harm people but are

driven by greed to produce these products that despite what the labels

say can't be used safely period. THEY SHOULD BE BANNED! There are

plenty of better ways there just are not as profitable.

On Mon, 8 Jan 2007 09:32:11 -0500, you wrote:

>People who are sick because of environmental toxins also should band

>together and form an association to push for some kind of compensation,

>because they can't work in normal work situations either. And that

>compensation should be much higher than social security because they were

>injured through no fault of their own. In a sense, they are the collateral

>damage caused by our leaders deliberate folly in not protecting people

>better.

January 9, 2007

I can not tell you how many times during my years in the Law Enforcement Field,

the SSD abusers I had the pleasure to arrest for crimes.

They claim a serious back injury for example and yet can manage to crawl up

the side of a building and break into it to steal and try to run like 'heck' to

get away.

Believe....it happens A LOT!!!!

Marcie

who <jeaninem660@...> wrote:

I personally find it hard to believe that the ss system is abused,

it's so hard to get it and it's not like you financally set for life

when you do get it. i've never been so poor in my life. sometimes you

have to stop and realize that someone on it may not look ill but is.

can't really judge when your not in thier shoes, right? i think this

is something we should be able to relate to.

>

> > " You look good " is code for " you're not dead yet, so you don't

deserve any

> >compensation "

> >

> >And even if you are dead, its very difficult to get a lawyer.. : /

> >

> >That's the way they work.. Are you surprised?

>

__________________________________________________

January 9, 2007

So, do you think our current 'honor system' works well with invisible

chemicals like pesticides? Its a similar situation in some ways to mold.

Diseases often take years to cripple, or years to appear after toxic

exposures. So even if a connection is fairly obvious, since people are

innocent until absolutely proven legally, evidence gathering is often

impossible by the time someone gets sick,or the statute of limitations has

ong past. There are so many obstacles for people. And so many people are old

or they don't make enough money (so lost income to their heirs from their

death would be fairly low) or for other reasons, lawyers aren't interested.

How can we deal with that? Also, what if the person who didn't follow the

guidelines doesn't volunteer that information to the people who

live/work/play there, they just get sick and don't know why?

On 1/8/07, Christ <antares41_41@...> wrote:

>

> I just want

> responsibility. When someone doesn't follow the guidelines with

> pesticides and someone get's hurt as a result there should be swift

> accountability process for all party's involved. It should be

> understood exactly what happened, what the consequences were and for

> who, and a plan to avoid a future mishap of the same type. I have to

> laugh when you here PCO'S talk about professionalism.

> Professionalism?? What a joke. How can you have professionalism when

> their is an entire segment of society made sick by this industry and

> instead of recognizing this fact and rectifying it so more people

> don't get injured they pay people off to cover it up and wink and nod.

> God only knows what all of the lawn chemicals are doing to our ground

> water. I am totally against this unnecessary destruction of our

> environment. Same goes for pesticides indoors. These company's know

> there are plenty of better ways that will not harm people but are

> driven by greed to produce these products that despite what the labels

> say can't be used safely period. THEY SHOULD BE BANNED! There are

> plenty of better ways there just are not as profitable.

>

> On Mon, 8 Jan 2007 09:32:11 -0500, you wrote:

>

> >People who are sick because of environmental toxins also should band

> >together and form an association to push for some kind of compensation,

> >because they can't work in normal work situations either. And that

> >compensation should be much higher than social security because they were

> >injured through no fault of their own. In a sense, they are the

> collateral

> >damage caused by our leaders deliberate folly in not protecting people

> >better.

>

January 10, 2007

This is true. Its like the situation with mold. Companies are on the 'honor

system' to not use dangerous chemicals, so

they studiously avoid being on the record with knowing anything is

dangerous.

Thats why these industries are so against research that shows things are

dangerous.

They don't want people to be able to show in court that they should have

known that something was killing or hurting people.

As long as they can convince a jury that they didn't know, they think that

they can avoid responsibility.

They have refined this art of not knowing things to a science. During the

Reagan years it was known as " plausible denial "

On 1/10/07, ldelp84227 <ldelp84227@...> wrote:

>

> you do know that the US accepts products that Japan, China,and

> the EU Government do not allow in their countries. The Bush

> Administration is trying to stop the regulation of dangerous chemicals

> that are in our products such as baby products, fragranced products.

> They even send the wood that Japan, etc. will not accept. I am not

> sure if you knew that info.

>

> I am actually for the responsible use of chemicals. They have made

> life so much better for so many people I would never want to stifle

> the progress we made or have the industry shift over to third world

> country's which will be even more irresponsible with them

>

January 12, 2007

On Mon, 8 Jan 2007 22:56:32 -0500, you wrote:

>So, do you think our current 'honor system' works well with invisible

>chemicals like pesticides? Its a similar situation in some ways to mold.

>

I really want to be objective and fair to all sides. I am kind of

caught in the middle here. I have used pesticides in the past as a

lawn maint contractor, I had to. Especially roundup. Although now

that I have been injured my opinion is very different. I don't trust

the people that say these chemicals are safe anymore where once I kind

of did. I don't believe pretty lawns are worth the destruction of our

ground water supplies. If it can be proven their completely safe and

are put under careful scrutiny maybe. But no more blank checks.

No more empty promises from them their products are safe.

As far as other branches of the chemical industries go I would have to

be a hypocrite to trash them because I use their products everyday. I

just want accountability. I want them to acknowledge when people are

hurt and make sure that it doesn't happen again. Kind of like when an

airplane crashes they send out investigators that turn the sight

upside down un till they know exactly what happened. ALL TO ENSURE IT

NEVER HAPPENS AGAIN! Our current system is to have medical Dr's lie

for them. Also we need to protect the environment.

I know there is organic farming but in all reality I have to wonder if

we didn't use pesticides would their be widespread shortages of

food? How would people afford it? I know I don't buy organic myself

it's too expensive. Would people in third world country's starve? Do I

have the right to tell them well your just going to have to starve

because I don't like these pesticide companies? Very difficult issue.

But the widespread corruption has to stop. I believe that their are

ten's, maybe hundred's of thousands of people in this country alone

that fell victim to these companies and companies like them. Hard

nosed Medical Dr's that suffer from the " Retarded Disconnect " don't

understand this so they call these victims phonies and slip and fall

artist's and give them a good swift kick in the teeth and throw them

out to the curb with a phony diagnosis to fend for themselves like

what was done to me.

Someone needs to show these Dr's what it feels like to be wiped out

financially and with no way to recuperate. Their needs to be a class

action suite against all 650,000 of them. The bases of the suite is

" institutionalized medical fraud " they need to stop operating in the

capacity of tobacco lawyer (defending criminals) while the whole time

hiding behind their medical degrees.

If this was done the hanky panky would stop over night.

>Diseases often take years to cripple, or years to appear after toxic

>exposures. So even if a connection is fairly obvious, since people are

>innocent until absolutely proven legally, evidence gathering is often

>impossible by the time someone gets sick,or the statute of limitations has

>ong past. There are so many obstacles for people. And so many people are old

>or they don't make enough money (so lost income to their heirs from their

>death would be fairly low) or for other reasons, lawyers aren't interested.

>How can we deal with that? Also, what if the person who didn't follow the

>guidelines doesn't volunteer that information to the people who

>live/work/play there, they just get sick and don't know why?

>

>On 1/8/07, Christ <antares41_41@...> wrote:

>>

>> I just want

>> responsibility. When someone doesn't follow the guidelines with

>> pesticides and someone get's hurt as a result there should be swift

>> accountability process for all party's involved. It should be

>> understood exactly what happened, what the consequences were and for

>> who, and a plan to avoid a future mishap of the same type. I have to

>> laugh when you here PCO'S talk about professionalism.

>> Professionalism?? What a joke. How can you have professionalism when

>> their is an entire segment of society made sick by this industry and

>> instead of recognizing this fact and rectifying it so more people

>> don't get injured they pay people off to cover it up and wink and nod.

>> God only knows what all of the lawn chemicals are doing to our ground

>> water. I am totally against this unnecessary destruction of our

>> environment. Same goes for pesticides indoors. These company's know

>> there are plenty of better ways that will not harm people but are

>> driven by greed to produce these products that despite what the labels

>> say can't be used safely period. THEY SHOULD BE BANNED! There are

>> plenty of better ways there just are not as profitable.

>>

>> On Mon, 8 Jan 2007 09:32:11 -0500, you wrote:

>>

>> >People who are sick because of environmental toxins also should band

>> >together and form an association to push for some kind of compensation,

>> >because they can't work in normal work situations either. And that

>> >compensation should be much higher than social security because they were

>> >injured through no fault of their own. In a sense, they are the

>> collateral

>> >damage caused by our leaders deliberate folly in not protecting people

>> >better.

>>

>

January 12, 2007

I was watching one of those reality " judge " tv shows yesterday and the issue of

the regulations regarding commercial pesticide application in the state of NY

came up. Apparently residential treatments were not as regulated as treatments

in commercial enviornments.

In my own neighborhood, when I moved in about 10 years ago before

gentrification set in, we had lots of lizards and " hoppy toads. " No more. It's

like Silent Spring by Carson.

Christ <antares41_41@...> wrote: