What are the economic factors that make some keywords cheap and others expensive? Supply and demand, obviously. If every one wants the top position for a given keyword then the price is bid upwards. If on the other hand, no one wants a keyword it can be had for 1¢ a click.
Why would it be that at the time of this entry, one of the top keywords is "Mesothelioma", a lung disease associated with exposure to asbestos? Anyone searching for that term might be suffering from it or know someone who is. The most obvious advertisements are paid for by law firms [hardly surprising considering their history]
hoping to represent people who have been affected or are willing to claim to be affected by the disease.
The RAND Institute for Civil Justice has recognized that asbestos litigation is the longest running mass tort in U.S. history. Recent sharp increases have been confirmed in the rate of filing asbestos claims in the United States, as have concomitant increases in the number and types of firms named as defendants, and also an escalation in the costs of the litigation to these defendants. (Analysts have estimated that the total costs of asbestos litigation in the USA alone will eventually reach $200 billion.)
The matter has become such a feeding frenzy for litigators that Senator Arlen Specter sponsored the so-called Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2005 which is described as a "A bill to create a fair and efficient system to resolve claims of victims for bodily injury caused by asbestos exposure, and for other purposes." In its present form this bill would create a $140 billion fund to compensate current and future asbestos victims and be funded by companies that are at risk of liability. Further the fund would create an administrative resolution to asbestos claims, putting a stop to the lawsuits.
The FAIR Act is also considered the best hope for veterans suffering from asbestos exposure:
Without the FAIR Act, veterans who were exposed to toxic asbestos while serving their country and who now suffer from fatal diseases will continue to be denied compensation.
While there may be room for improvements in the FAIR Act, it remains the most viable solution to the asbestos problem. The bill would remove asbestos claims from an overwhelmed court system and compensate sick asbestos victims from a privately financed trust fund. The FAIR Act would provide certainty to sick veterans seeking compensation for their asbestos-related illnesses.
--- Michael Penny, Kentucky VFW
Here are some more grim facts about what Supreme Court Justice David Souter described as the "elephantine mass" of asbestos litigation:
- More than 700,000 people have sued companies that made or used asbestos.
- Companies have paid some $70 billion in settlements and damage awards
- More than 70 businesses have entered into bankruptcy.
- Hundreds of thousands of cases remain stacked up on court dockets.
On thousands of junk web pages it has become fodder for unscrupulous webmasters who publish sentence fragments and jumbled copies of text lifted from a few legitimate websites in the hope of making a quick buck. If we are lucky the fervor will eventually die down as the Federal government continues its efforts to minimize the economic impact on businesses of this far-reaching litigious issue.
If you are someone who needs help and information about mesothelioma here are some legitimate resources on the web: