Insurance companies do not offer a service. There is no value other than to share holders. I had to explain to my daughter that it is literally illegal for a CEO to do the right thing if it will cost shareholders. They leach profits by being an unnecessary middleman and finding every loophole they can so they don’t have to actually do the thing they say they exist for.
I mean, there are huge problems with American health care companies and insurance in general will always tend towards being a scam unless it’s extremely heavily regulated, but at a fundamental level insurance does offer a service (that of socializing the cost of extreme losses), and while executives do have fiduciary duties, the idea that they always have to pursue short term profit no matter what from a legal standpoint, is overblown and exaggerated.
This fella shot the CEO of UnitedHealthcare (An American health insurance company) dead in the street in NYC yesterday in incredibly cold blooded and seemingly-personal fashion.
I wouldn’t call it cold blooded, the CEO was cold blooded. The shooter presumably only murdered one person, the healthcare CEO was undoubtedly a mass murderer.
He can submit a complaint to the complaints department by phone between 10am and 4pm mountain time Tuesdays and thursdays. Expected response is 2-5 business months.
I don’t really celebrate murder, but I’m certainly not gonna mourn the loss of someone responsible for many preventable deaths bcz they wanted a bigger paycheck.
Understandably. I’m emotionally removed from the situation enough to know that I shouldn’t actively celebrate, if I knew a loved one who’s medical care was denied by a for profit health insurer or if I had to waste my life fighting with them for basic care, then I’m sure I would be actively celebrating too.
I rightly celebrate when evil is destroyed. That ceo killed a huge number of innocent people just so he could make himself even ultra wealthier. That's true evil. The shooter is an absolute hero.
In a better world the serial killer ceo would go to trial and be jailed for the rest of his life. But in the world we actually live in, the ceo would have faced zero consequences for his evil acts, and he would've continued living a life of ultra wealth while he continued murdering thousands more innocent people. So in lieu of legal consequences, shooting him is the most good thing that anyone could've done.
Turns out that looting millions of people’s healthcare for profit and ruining a large subset of their lives doesn’t garner you any sympathy. Crazy how that works.
It’s pretty wild how little empathy humanity has as a whole. The discourse on Lemmy around this murder has been a little disturbing. The man had children.
Edited to add, people trying to gotcha me by saying people who were denied healthcare also had children aren’t making the point they think they are. Empathy goes all ways. The comment I replied to said that you can not approve of his work while also not celebrating his death. That’s what I’m agreeing with. Imagine being a child and seeing the internet actively celebrating your father’s death. It’s fucked up.
If you sincerely think that my comment is expressing support for his company denying health coverage for other people with children, then we simply cannot have a rational conversation.
As did many of the thousands of people who died from being denied treatment in order to push his wage packet up another million dollars. Some of them were children themselves.
Quite frankly, executives of health insurance companies continually make money by denying medical coverage to people with children and letting them agonizingly die slowly.
I’m not on here celebrating his death for the sole reason that I think it’s just as likely this corporate espionage / assassination for money, but if it is a normal person shooting a health insurance executive for denying a loved ones’ coverage it’s hard to imagine how the executive didn’t deserve it.
You don’t get to be separated from the morality of your actions, just because you use neutral sounding business language to describe how you’re fucking over and killing people for personal profit.
The man also built a company that refused to provide anti-vomit meds to children on chemo. “Think of the children,” they demanded, while thinking of literally no children but their own.
This is the definition of keyhole compassion. You feel more for the monster who made millions off denying medical care to people, stealing their money, and laughing all the way to the bank rather than the people he deliberately let suffer and die.
Your take is disgusting. The executive class should be living in constant fear after all the crimes they have committed to the working class, poor, colonized, enslaved, and otherwise marginalized people.
Then maybe you should focus on the robber barons creating this crisis instead of concern trolling the people who have been locked out of institutional power and must use violence to get any kind of justice.
Miss me with this bullshit. Bad people deserve bad endings, and he got what he deserved.
If our laws and justice system ever decide to start working for anyone except the rich, then maybe I’ll start giving a fuck about them. I’m sure Trump and Elon will get right on that.
Where should he have been gunned down then? The footage was pretty good, but better lighting and sound would be nice.
Getting gunned down is exactly what should happen to mass murderers. That is exactly what this guy was. When the system fails as consistently as ours has, people are going to take care of justice themselves. The fact that it hasn’t happened at scale is the result of remarkable restraint on the part of the working class.
This isn’t a Lemmy thing. This response has been nearly universal in every space where public comments can be found.
We left Reddit because it was a corporate captured shit show that killed the only nice apps for interacting with it. We didn’t leave because they were too mean to health insurance executives, or because they made glib jokes in dark situations.
From what I can tell, that’s not unique to the lemmy network.
I guess being loathed and having an indifferent at best reaction to your murder is one potential negative consequence of participating in an industry that that devalues human life in exchange for profit as a matter of course.
Jak widzę “Centralna Ewidencja Czegośtam” to przede wszystkim widzę kolejny klocek do wielkiej państwowej maszyny która pozwala wypluć wszystko o wszystkich. Jaki jest problem, żeby ta wiedza o lokalach pozostawała np na poziomie samorządów ?
Gdyby ktoś miał wątpliwości - ta grafika to większość ‘strategii’. W moim rozumieniu strategia powinna być nie tylko określeniem celu (zawartość grafiki), ale też tego jak tam dojść…
Ciekawe, indeed. Zaskakuje wysokie poparcie trumpizmu w Czechach i Słowenii. Ogólnie na oko dobra korelacja poparcia Harris/Demokratów z postrzeganą Postępowością danego terytorium. Ciekawe, kto to są “Others” – Bernie Sanders chyba nie startował, ain’t?
Mimo mocno zabetonowanej sceny politycznej i JOWów w USA wciąż można rejestrować inne partie i wystawiać swoich kandydatów. W 2024 kandydowali: Robert F. Kennedy Jr (niezależny), Cornell West (niezależny), Jill Stein (Zieloni) i Chase Oliver (Libertarianie).
Możliwe że któryś z tych kandydatów zrobił jakiś umizg do Szwajcarów i coś tam ugrał.
Dzięki! Hmm. Kandydaci kandydatami; pozwalam sobie i na taką spekulację, iż kraje członkowskie UE lepiej “mapują się” (z przekonania lub… nieświadomości alternatyw) na podział Dems-Reps w Stanach, natomiast Switzerlandia nieco idzie swoją, “konfederacyjną” drogą, o rysie konserwatywno-libertariańskim; populacja ma nieco inaczej postawione okno Overtona. Aby to zbadać, odniósłbym poll do innych “idiosynkratycznych” terytoriów – Islandii, Grenlandii, San Marino. Mierzalny odsetek alternatywnych wskazań wystąpił też w Norwegii i Finlandii, kultywujących pewne odrębności.
Już abstrachując od tego, że kretyński jest taki rewanżyzm i mściwość w polityce, nawet jeśli zarzut jest poważny i uzasadniony, to prowadzące mówiły że rozmawiały z Matysiak przed nagraniem tego odcinka i w ich ocenie ona to robi tylko i wyłącznie żeby grać na siebie nie zważając na szkodę partii. Co zgadzałoby się z tym, co w oświadczeniu napisało Razem, tj. zaproponowali żeby była to inicjatywa na poziomie partyjnym, a nie jej prywatne ustawianie się z Horałą. Więc kto wie, może jej właśnie chodziło o wzbudzenie kontrowersji i zabłyśnięcie w mediach jako polityczka odrzucający neoliberalny “niedasizm”, ale niebędąca jednocześnie zacofaną intelektualnie konserwą, jak kojarzony jest PiS.
Dokładnie. Polityk zawsze gra na siebie. Nie trzeba spędzić wielu lat w Sejmie żeby szybko zarazić się tym bakcylem. Zobacz na takiego Dariusza Jońskiego, ile razy i jak perfidnie zmieniał stronnictwa, dogadując się z kim popadnie. Tylko przy całej swojej ogólnej indolencji intelektualnej wiedział też jak lawirować i długo i cierpliwie przyklejał się do odpowiednich osób, pnąc się powolutku w górę w politycznej grze. Matysiak chciała zrobić to samo tylko na skróty. Zagrała w głupie gry i wygrała głupie nagrody.
Ale oczywiście władze Lewicy również należy prądem.
i.redd.it
Gorące