100%(9)9 out of 9 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 25 - 27 out of 42 pages.
However they cannot do what we in the U.S. allow them to do. If we don’t buy it then they just waste theirtimes bring it to the front lines. I think they should not be tort liability because we allowed it to come overinto the U.S.When looking at the steps in the U.S. as well as the manufacturer’s steps, I think they the U.S. should beliable for what they allow into the country. They could warn consumers about the harmful products letterthe people know about the danger to their health. I never understood why they would ever allow it tocome over into the U.S. from the get go. I also think if we are going to trade than the trade should be ofgood products not bad.United States Consumer Product Safety Commission. ()Product liability
1/24/2017Topic Print View(NEXT(73feebc963))/Main/CourseMode/Topic/TopicPrintView.ed?topicID=6000009728757&sortBy=Title&sortOrder=A…26/42RE: Product LiabilityLauraMarie Greene11/5/2016 11:12:34 AMHi Joyce, you bring up some interesting points. I agree that companies should be liable,but I thought of another viewpoint while reading your post. You mention stopping them frombringing their food to the US. This would be a way to eliminate all risk, but there could be anextreme downside as well. If we just look at the example of apples, and eliminated all appleimports, this could cause economic issues for the US. Sure, we would not have to worry aboutbad apples, but we would not have the import of good apples either. This would lower thesupply of apples here in the US and the price of apples would go up. I think another solutionwould be for companies to regulate the quality of goods coming from China rather than toeliminating them in order to avoid economic ripples in the US.RE: Product LiabilityInstructor Muniak11/6/2016 7:07:19 AMJoyce, Laura-Marie, Jacob, Jordan, and Toby: Thanks for your responses tothis week's second discussion question. Would you characterize the liabilityeach of you referred to as consistent with a "strict liability” theory? In otherwords, should liability be dependent upon the showing that a companybreached an established duty of care? Or is the fact of ultimate injury anddamages to the consumer sufficient to establish liability?In either case, and most importantly, WHY? Prof WJMRE: Product LiabilityToby Ray11/6/2016 8:58:52 AMJoyce,The issue may be what is "good" here and what is "good" there? The United States has beendoing business with China for many years and we all know that the products and the cost areboth cheaper there. We have seen so many cases where Chinese products are dangerous andvideos showing what is done to food products there, and yet we continue to do business withthem. Is that China's fault? I feel that the companies that are using their labor and their productsor ingredients are playing Russian Roulette with their customers lives. if the retailers haveinformation that their supplying companies are using Chinese ingredients or products and are not