So for those truly skeptical people, I propose a simple experiment that will show you how powerful this technique is, while
insuring against major loss.
Not exact matches
In the first place, most
major corporate misconduct implicates senior corporate officials, such that a regime of personal — rather than corporate — liability would provide them with incentives to cause the corporate entity to
insure against the risk of such
losses, which satisfies the goal of compensation.
These perils are common enough that they're worth
insuring against and cause
major enough
losses to be devastating.
These perils are common enough that they're worth
insuring against and cause
major enough
losses to be devastating.