OptionalOut of 169
rustyfishKinda flabbergasted it ranks that high.
š° š š± š¦ š³ š¦ š° š® We just want to keep it on the funny sex number so we actually had to suck a little bit more when we rose to 68th.
The US contains some of the best cancer research centers in the world, most of which are non profits. On top of this you genuinely can buy the best care if you can afford it, as top talent across the world go to the US to get rich if theyāve lost all their morals.
Itās just everyone except the super rich and people with rare cancers that might someday affect rich people that canāt get care without bankruptcy and have to use enshittified hospitals.
alot of that talent in stem research comes from people immigrating here too, now that is being threatened i suspect they will go to EU, australia for thier work. i cant say the same for people going through school to TRYING to get into he field(which is a different set of problems)
If you have decent insurance, itās ok. The problem is it either ties you to your job and/or is very expensive. People fall through the cracks.
Free Luigi
Maple EngineerCanada is number 32. Maybe the US should become Canadaās fourth territory. We should talk to Premier Trump about it.
Not nice.
eruDid he save it tho?
Nazi US seems pretty unsaved to me, right now š
Of course, this is a joke and I know you/he mean āhe who trys saving his countryā¦ā and I know that is a Trump quote
Nazi US seems pretty unsaved to me, right now š
Of course, this is a joke and I know you/he mean āhe who trys saving his countryā¦ā and I know that is a Trump quote
Sir this is a Wendyās.
š you are absolutely right
He should have done something about it instead of throwing a tantrum with a deadly weapon.
What would you suggest?
What would you suggest?
Running for office, starting a competitive company, or just general political activism against the people who caused this problem, literally anything.
Here is the perspective: Luigi was the son of the multimillionaire owner of Mangione Family Enterprises. He had an Ivy League Education and a cushy tech job with 3 figure salary. He 3D printed a gun at home, took $20,000 cash to live off while on the run, and murdered a stranger.
Imagine how much good you could have done in his position, instead of throwing it all away.
cheers_queersthereās no evidence provided yet that it was even Luigi. Iām tired of seeing everyone talking about this like we know he did it. INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.
nullSo? The criticism is with people celebrating whoever did do it. Whether itās actually him or not isnāt really relevant to that.
GladiusBThatās what symbols usually do. He represents the hope that equality can still be had. Since itās so fuckin bleak with your government and due process. We will die waiting for them to change and then they donāt have to listen.
He represents the hope that equality can still be had.
How does he do that?
By equalizing their power to understand they are still vulnerable.
āEqualizing their power to understandā
Thatāsā¦ a word salad.
I mean if you arenāt smart enough to understand I donāt feel compelled to explain.
If you arenāt smart enough to explain it, then we can just file it under ābullshitā.
Or Iām smart enough to know you are so full of shit for trolling or you are too stupid to understand what I am talking about. So Iām not going to waste my time.
Or Iām smart enough
Well we know itās not that
We? Are all your personalities here? Iām just going to block you. You seem to not take a hint
We is you and me, genius.
Hint? You were always allowed to stop saying dumb shit to me. Donāt have to wait for my invitation.
schizolol9Free Luigi!
ThatWeirdGuy1001You should also Luigi anyone you know who voted for Trump. They are directly responsible for everything currently happening and do not deserve to feel safe.
ZomgDonāt ask for things you wonāt do yourself, you look like a fool
Too bad I have to have plausible deniability.
We should focus on killing rich people.
Define rich.
x00zWe canāt really be mad at them. They have been manipulated into the beliefs they think are their own. Oh and their IQ is far below average.
What did Brian Thompson do/fail to do that makes this statistic his fault, and for death to be the morally justified consequence?
Edit: Iāll reframe this as a statement. Celebrating the murder of Brian Thompson and especially advocating for more acts like it is abhorrent behaviour.
You think none of the decisions of the CEO of UHC affected this statistic at all? I feel like thereās a LOT of UNC policy that he was involved in that results in worse healthcare in the US, including but not limited to āAIā for denials.
I donāt think we have a uniform moral calculus, but my personal one doesnāt justify the death penalty in this case. I can imagine a moral calculus that does though: hours of excess suffering caused > expected lifespan = death penalty.
I can imagine someone justifying murdering someone who looked at them funny. So what?
I donāt think you have engaged with any of my arguments. Iām going to block you for a couple of weeks.
Your arguments:
- Asking me if I believed something I didnāt say.
- Telling me that you have the mental capacity to imagine someone justifying something heinous.
Gee, what a shame it will be to be cut off from such a mastermind.
If a gun is just a tool and the man who weilds it is responsible for the actions of said tool then tell me why should a person who weilds a tool that murders over 50,000 people shouldnāt be responsible for those murders?
The difference between what they allege Luigi did as opposed to that other shit stain is that the shit stain directly profited from murdering those people, and Luigi is alleged to have done it out of retribution.
United Healthcareās profits were around 16+ billion a year in 2024. So letās say it was only 10 for his 20 years. They would mean Thompson made $200,000,000,000 off murdering over 50,000 people. Not even the devil murders people for money.
canajacAllege? LOL
If a gun is just a tool and the man who weilds it is responsible for the actions of said tool then tell me why should a person who weilds a tool that murders over 50,000 people shouldnāt be responsible for those murders?
I mean, off the top ā intent.
But letās break this down. Be specific and map the killer, the gun, and the action of pointing and shooting with intent to kill onto your comparison of Brian, this ātoolā, and the actions he took with it.
United Healthcareās profits were around 16+ billion a year in 2024.
And how much did they take in from premiums in 2024? How much of what they took in did they pay out to claimants?
The intent was to deny healthcare to enough people to make higher profits. The intent of privatized healthcare is not to save lives but expense them. There is no moral or ethical reason to tell an ER surgeon you will make more money the more surgeries you deny, so why would it make any more sense for the insurance companies to be deciding what procedures should or should not be funded. The only times a procedure should be denied is if there is a limited supply of something, say heart transplants. Even then, it should never be up to the insurance companies, it should be up to the doctors determining the best odds and usage of the shortage to save as many lives as possible.
The intent was to deny healthcare to enough people to make higher profits.
Explain how you think that works.
For profit industries are required to put out projections for growth. Those projections are what intices investors to buy their stock raising demand/value. If you do not hit those growths the company will be seen as failing and investments will slow. There are a couple ways insurance companies can increase revenue, one is raising premiums which will often price users out of purchasing coverage and therefore they would potentially lose revenue to other companies or simply by more of the population not having insurance. The other way is to insure people at the same rate, but limit their plans coverages and slowly take out bits and pieces upping copays here, lower maximum coverages, but standardly they want to avoid raising the deductible as it will turn away people from signing up. Kind of like shrinkflation if you will, but for insurance. Then they āhadā to get more competitive, and they found that they can just deny coverage on situations and users often canāt afford to fight these denials, so they make more money off denying them then they do fighting court cases against the few that can, also they can just give in settle and pay for those who do try to take them to court. Paperwork paperwork paperwork, 6 months later it didnāt get approved still. Since they are a for profit company, they are held accountable by their shareholders. Which means they can actually be sued by their own shareholders if they donāt show they are doing everything they can to make the bottom line go up. Does Charlie need the $65,000 treatment vs the $14,000 treatment, shareholders say $14,000. He has higher odds of survival on the $65,000 treatment, and will have a better quality of life, no thank you. Line needs to go up. So Charlie dies in the table because that $41,000 was needed to be thrown into our $16 billion profit for the year. Or you know, maybe Charlie died because he had to wait those 6 months for approval for the treatment and by that time his issues had progressed to a point that made his chances much lower.
For profit healthcare is not for the health of the people.
Thatās an interesting little fantasy thatās brings us nicely back to the question you dodged, since youāre clinging again to this $16B number:
And how much did they take in from premiums in 2024? How much of what they took in did they pay out to claimants?
Not a fantasy, it happens all the time. As for how much they āpaid outā is irrelevant. It doesnāt matter how much Apple pays for their products. The point is simple. For Profit healthcare is just that, for Profit. Not for Health. Anyone with a moral compass would want a For Health, healthcare system. Profits should never be put above lives. The reason why Americans pay more than twice what Canadians pay and have to do so out of pocket while having a lower ranked healthcare system on many metrics is because of that for Profit system.
Your question is to put simply, How much of the peopleās money did they give back to the people when they needed it? And the answer is always, less than the people paid in. If the number is less than what people paid in, there should never have been a single denial or wait period.
Not a fantasy, it happens all the time.
Source?
As for how much they āpaid outā is irrelevant.
Huh? Itās extremely relevantā¦ The claim is that people are paying their premiums and then having their claims denied while the insurance company pockets the differenceā¦
And all of that is cute, but youāve still failed to map your comparison to murder with a gun to prove that it was morally justified to murder Brian Thompson. Are you gonna get to that part ever?
Profit (or loss) is the difference between the total revenues of a business and the total costs of a business. And although this is a somewhat simplified view of the facts, the profit in this scenario is directly representative of the amount of money people paid into premiums that was pocketed by the healthcare corporation rather than being paid out in medical coverage.
It is impossible to be objective when it comes to ethical dilemmas (an inherently subjective matter), but let me leave you with a couple questions: How bad does a personās actions have to be to deserve death? How many people do they have to let die for personal (or corporate) gains?
The blame for the numerous unnecessary deaths United Healthcare played a part in can obviously not be ascribed to one person, but Brian Thompson was at least complicit in all of those deaths. He was the one with a lot of the decision-making power in all of those individual situations, and chose to strengthen a system that causes so much suffering when we have plenty of examples of a better way to handle these problems.
And although this is a somewhat simplified view of the facts, the profit in this scenario is directly representative of the amount of money people paid into premiums that was pocketed by the healthcare corporation rather than being paid out in medical coverage.
Iāll give you a hint, they paid out 80% of what they took in. Whether thatās 1B or 16B, they paid out 80% of that.
How bad does a personās actions have to be to deserve death? How many people do they have to let die for personal (or corporate) gains?
Certainly worse than āparticipation in a system that profits from people paying for healthcareā. Iām asking you to provide a morally sound justification for this specific murder.
but Brian Thompson was at least complicit in all of those deaths
So was the desk worker in accounting. Are you saying itās good to murder them too?
80% paid out means 20% stolen.
So was the desk workerā¦ Do they have the ability to make executive decisions for united healthcare? I think not.
80% paid out means 20% stolen.
Iām curious how you think a āfreeā healthcare system somehow operates without a budgetā¦
Do they have the ability to make executive decisions for united healthcare? I think not.
They canāt refuse to carry out work that contributes to these unjust acts? Shouldnāt it be their duty to commit fraud against the company in favour of the client?
I think you may have missed the point, there are obviously costs associated with managing money (e.g. reasonable employee salaries), but āprofitā should not come into play. As profit in this scenario is directly related to premiums paid to the provider that were not used to provide healthcare ā the service those premiums were paid for.
That is a flaw in all āfor profitā healthcare providers; however, policies enacted by Brian Thompson in particular as the Chief Executive Officer of United Healthcare made it one of the worst offenders.
Ethics are a very subjective measure, and I am not some kind of god that can say exactly what moral consequences resulted from the death of Brian Thompson, but the case for a justified murder here is very good under almost any philosophy most ascribe to.
As for your accountant, it may be possible to ascribe some of the blame of some deaths to them, but more likely than not, they are just a person trying to make it through the day at work, following orders from higher up. That obviously does not completely excuse them from their duties to their fellow man, but from what we know or can guess about this hypothetical person, they were not the ones making the decision to make the system actively worse for a majority of the people that they served. Brian Thompson did make those decisions, and from my point of view, got what he deserved.
So the CTO and CDO ā youād like them to be murdered yeah? Since they would have been in charge of the infamous AI.
Who else in the C-suite would you like to be murdered?
What about presidents? VPs? Directors? Maybe just a light stabbing?
Punishment for abuse of power should be proportional to the power abused, these people had influence, but not as much as the CEO. Murder, or more aptly āassassinationā is not something that should be taken lightly.
Does no one deserve death in your view? Or do only those that kill violently deserve death?
How bad does a leader have to be considered violent in your eyes? Would they have to command an army to kill innocent lives? Or do you think they would have to wield a gun themselves?
So the CTO and CDO? Murder, or no?