By Tom Davey
Nasdaq has flatlined; Nortel has plummeted along with my other high-tech stocks, so why am I not downhearted? Because the immutable laws of physics indicate that when high-tech sectors fall, opportunities for low-life stocks such as my Rent-a-Mob companies will rise.
Rent-a-Mob did particularly well when I launched it in Canada during the first flush of environmental activism. In those early days, I offered a full range of protest teams, from blue-collar rednecks, observed in bars during losing streaks at Maple Leaf hockey games (a protracted recruiting season), to tweed-clad academics who could spout polysyllabic nonsense with affected English accents, especially during television interviews.
The blue-collar group was for intimidation; the academic contingent was brought in later as counterpunches of irritation and obfuscation. But my most feared line of protesters were the bona fide hockey mothers whose tungsten-tipped tonsils had been hardened and sharpened while screaming at referees during years of pre-dawn peewee hockey schedules. They were particularly effective during political protests where they repeatedly evoked sympathy while cutting into complex issues with counter arguments so simplistic they could only fit on bumper stickers.
When the usual journalistic preferences for sensational headlines at the expense of scientific realities are blended to the mix, we now have the ingredients for real political change based on perception, not realities.
Environmental issues were a major component of the early Rent-a-Mob successes. PCBs, PVCs, urea-formaldehyde and chlorine were among the first chemicals to be demonized before the protesters moved on to garbage treatment, but the anti-chlorine protest business fell like a stone after the E. coli O157:H7 drinking water problems.
Rent-a-Mob's effective opposition to all kinds of garbage incineration spawned many other environmental problems, with the subsequent and protracted blocking of any landfill site alternatives. It was like discovering the laws of perpetual motion as various garbage projects were shuffled around before resting in expensive limbos.
But while my protest franchises surged during the late '70s and '80s, business leveled off until the totally unexpected eruptions against globalization and opportunities such as Peppergate in British Columbia and latterly in Québec City and Gottenburg. These protesters gave rise to an entirely new venture, the Victim Business. It is admittedly, an unlikely source of revenue, as the word victim would indicate someone who has lost, not gained from an occurrence. But emerging data indicate an abundance of wealth could stem from victim enterprises, most absurd, some tragic.
Some 12 years ago, Britain had its Hillsborough disaster when 96 football fans were crushed to death -- a terrible tragedy which still haunts the world of soccer. Now a retired British police officer has been awarded £330,000 (approximately $750,000 Canadian) in an out-of-court settlement for post-traumatic stress after he revisited the football stadium nine years later, while employed on another job. This amount, reported The Guardian's James Lewis, was more than 100 times the amount awarded to the victims' relatives.
Canada is already proving to be fertile ground for the emerging victim trend. An Ontario woman, Linda Hunt was awarded $300,000 after a judge found her employer partially responsible for injuries she sustained while driving home drunk following an office Christmas party in December, 1994. Ms. Hunt rejected offers from her boss to arrange for her to get home safely -- including calling her husband to pick her up. Instead, she left the party and continued drinking at a local pub.
Driving home later, she collided with a pickup truck, suffering severe head injuries including brain damage, broken bones and a fractured spine. Ontario Supreme Court Judge Clair Marchand ruled that Ms. Hunt was 75% responsible for the crash and its damages, including her own injuries, totalling about $1.12 million. He ruled the pub and Ms. Hunt's employer were responsible for the other 25%, about $300,000 when fees and interest were added. As the pub no longer had any assets, settlement costs will fall on the insurer for Hunt's employer.
The judge ruled that asking Ms. Hunt if she wanted a ride home was insufficient as the alcohol had impaired her judgement! I see many problems for this ruling in the real world; what's an employer to do, tie up workers who insist on driving home while drunk? No doubt this could provoke allegations of bondage, creating another victim project.
While many Dot-Coms have risen and fallen recently, there seems to be no limits to the growth potential of the victim industry which effortlessly crosses national and international borders.
In the United States lives a woman who claims her life hasn't been the same since she was hit by lightning some six years ago on New Smyrna Beach. She has sued Volusia County for not warning her about an approaching storm. The lawsuit says beach lifeguards knew about it, were making their own preparations to seek shelter, but didn't warn bathers.
It gets even better. And I am not making this up. In Pennsylvania, a man endeavoured to sue God! However, a US federal judge has rejected a lawsuit by the man who claims that his life was ruined by a US Corporation after they fired him more than thirty years ago. This same person also sued God for taking "no corrective action" against his enemies and demanded that God compensate him by returning his youth and granting him guitar-playing skills.
But surely, even in America, not even the US Supreme Court could rule against the Supreme Being?
The "E" business may have slumped, but with judicial rulings like these, the "V" business is certain to become the stock market's newest fad.
This article was abridged from Environmental Science & Engineering magazine, which also contains many more articles not posted on our Web Site. See our home page on how to order your subscription. We regret we can only accept orders from Canada and the United States.