Consumer groups have generally opposed the idea of product liability reform using which of the following arguments? Punitive damages should be limited. Strict liability should be retained. The burden of proof should be shifted to consumers. Losers should be made to pay some of the other side's legal bills.

Strict Liability should be retained

Explanation:

Product liability refers to the liability that shall be assumed by the manufacturer in the case the product turns out to be faulty and consumer sustains loss or injury owing to it.

Strict liability clause refers to manufacturer being held responsible for all the individuals who may sustain an injury with or without any fault in the product. Under this, the injured whether he is the buyer or any third person who suffers an injury can sue the manufacturer for damages.

The strict liability clause is too harsh on the manufacturer since without any fault in the product, it makes the manufacturer or seller liable for product liability. Thus it has been opposed generally by the consumer groups.  

i guess you could put raise the economic balance

answer; sensory adaptation;