Dr. Melissa writes of people in the recent airline crash into the Hudson. One, who suffered a bloody nose, is ponder that most American of questions: "How much money will make me whole again?"
I like to think, in the same position, I would refuse any money.
The flight was a victim of an act of Vengeful Gaia. The airline suffered real damages--more real damages than the passengers, I would guess. (What does a tow cost from the Hudson for a 747? Was it a 747?)
The pilot produced the best possible outcome (even if our Althouse pal rhhardin dismisses the landing as a trivial example of competence).
Wouldn't you feel a little wrong about taking money from a company that had done nothing wrong, had in fact done everything right, and was likely to suffer more than you in the long run?
Or would you just feel like you needed to be compensated?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I guess I'm naive: it never occurred to me that anyone would sue from that flight. Depressing.
ReplyDeletePeople lost valuable things, so I can see the inclination.
ReplyDeleteAnd I've sort-of softened my take; that is, if the airliner had (or should have had) insurance to cover acts of God (do they even do that?) then being compensated for lost goods is fair.
But pain and suffering? Being "made whole" because you suffered a bloody nose?
Fie on it.
I totally agree. If there is insurance for any lost valuables, I could understand claiming something of significant value if it was lost - that's what insurance is for. Beyond that is just sort of obscene.
ReplyDelete