For anyone out of the loop, Brian Thompson, the CEO of an American Insurance company, UnitedHealthcare, was killed by a mask man in New York a few days ago. Instead of people being horrified, people celebrated the assassin since Thompson and his company was hated by a lot people for denying many people of their health insurance and we're more interested in profits by increasing their medical bills.
The words "deny", "defend", and "depose" that were found on the bullet casings, is a reference to a tactic scummy insurance companies use to deny their customers coverage and increase profits.
do we just allow direct calls for violence on this site now?
They implemented an AI call automation system that doubled their rate of denials specifically to increase profit. Denials for anything they deem 'expensive,' like cancer treatments. One of their fellow companies just tried to do basically the same thing with anesthesia. The average reaction of doctors and nurses to this news was undisguised glee, because they are the ones who have to watch these patients die of totally treatable ailments.
And before anyone tries to claim that we'd be in worse hands with Scandinavian-style socialized healthcare and their government 'death panels,' I will remind y'all that selfsame description is the specific job of insurance actuaries.
They implemented an AI call automation system that doubled their rate of denials specifically to increase profit. Denials for anything they deem 'expensive,' like cancer treatments. One of their fellow companies just tried to do basically the same thing with anesthesia. The average reaction of doctors and nurses to this news was undisguised glee, because they are the ones who have to watch these patients die of totally treatable ailments.
And before anyone tries to claim that we'd be in worse hands with Scandinavian-style socialized healthcare and their government 'death panels,' I will remind y'all that description is the specific job of insurance actuaries.
I'm not arguing against your comment but this seems like an incitement of violence, specifically murder. The image, not your comment.
Supposedly an anonymous employee stated to journalists that Brian Thompson was rather vocal internally on needing to change the culture of insurance to improve things and was more open to talk about issues other executives refused to discuss. Whether that was objectively true or just someone trying to spin things positively of him, I can't say.
They implemented an AI call automation system that doubled their rate of denials specifically to increase profit. Denials for anything they deem 'expensive,' like cancer treatments. One of their fellow companies just tried to do basically the same thing with anesthesia. The average reaction of doctors and nurses to this news was undisguised glee, because they are the ones who have to watch these patients die of totally treatable ailments.
And before anyone tries to claim that we'd be in worse hands with Scandinavian-style socialized healthcare and their government 'death panels,' I will remind y'all that selfsame description is the specific job of insurance actuaries.
That does not even remotely address my question, murder is still murder even if the victim is not a good person.
They implemented an AI call automation system that doubled their rate of denials specifically to increase profit. Denials for anything they deem 'expensive,' like cancer treatments. One of their fellow companies just tried to do basically the same thing with anesthesia. The average reaction of doctors and nurses to this news was undisguised glee, because they are the ones who have to watch these patients die of totally treatable ailments.
And before anyone tries to claim that we'd be in worse hands with Scandinavian-style socialized healthcare and their government 'death panels,' I will remind y'all that selfsame description is the specific job of insurance actuaries.
Supposedly an anonymous employee stated to journalists that Brian Thompson was rather vocal internally on needing to change the culture of insurance to improve things and was more open to talk about issues other executives refused to discuss. Whether that was objectively true or just someone trying to spin things positively of him, I can't say.
things like layoffs after record profits and the fact that denial claims actually increased under him, you realize that he was a piece of shit. I get PR is gonna PR but saying that when his actions showed the exact opposite is disgusting.
things like layoffs after record profits and the fact that denial claims actually increased under him, you realize that he was a piece of shit. I get PR is gonna PR but saying that when his actions showed the exact opposite is disgusting.
He was CEO for around three years, I can't say how much someone can change things in just three years time. For example the now ousted CEO of Intel, Pat Gelsinger, was CEO for just over 3 years and the products that Intel released since he started (again) as CEO were things well in the pipeline before him. They're of course different businesses, but 3 years time isn't a long time to make change either, especially if your business is very large.
He was CEO for around three years, I can't say how much someone can change things in just three years time. For example the now ousted CEO of Intel, Pat Gelsinger, was CEO for just over 3 years and the products that Intel released since he started (again) as CEO were things well in the pipeline before him. They're of course different businesses, but 3 years time isn't a long time to make change either, especially if your business is very large.
Some excerpts of his brilliant ideas like:
"value-based care" model by paying doctors and other caregivers to keep patients healthy rather than focusing on treating them after they get sick
Increasing the denial rate from 8.7% to 22.7% in his first year as ceo
Was the one that implemented the well thought out AI feature to automate claims
You're right that he wasn't there long but all he did was make things worse for people using the service. This narrative of him being a benevolent CEO is fiction and a shit one.
"value-based care" model by paying doctors and other caregivers to keep patients healthy rather than focusing on treating them after they get sick
Increasing the denial rate from 8.7% to 22.7% in his first year as ceo
Was the one that implemented the well thought out AI feature to automate claims
You're right that he wasn't there long but all he did was make things worse for people using the service. This narrative of him being a benevolent CEO is fiction and a shit one.
Honestly, the fact that the goddamn monster almost fucking tripled the denial rate in a single year is kind of impressive in a horrible way. Here's to hoping this makes his successor think twice- before someone shoots twice.
Seriously, I hope the shooter gets away like whoever killed Ken McElroy, where nobody saw a thing because nobody wanted to see anything.
My brain is cooking a theory that UHC is gonna go Boeing and find the shooter before the cops do out of spite. Given their ludicrous profits and power I wouldn’t put it past them to try. Even if it galvanizes the public further to make him a martyr, UHC is too tone deaf to care.
edit: Welp, I was flat out wrong. Time to see what the dude's defense will do.
I should have been more specific. I meant the claim that the poster knows what the "average" opinion of health care providers in the US is. Most likely it's just their opinion, and they are falsely attributing it to others because either: A) they assume without basis that their peers share their opinion, B) they are making extrapolations to a population of hundreds of thousands of people based on a sample size of maybe three, C) they are too much of a coward to take ownership of their opinion, or D) they are a troll or bad actor.
I'm not arguing the health industry in the US isn't broken, but thinking that murdering executives will fix it is moronic. And I think attributing "glee at the death of a human being" to a group of people who's job it is to save lives is extraordinarily insulting.
Arcana55 said: Most likely it's just their opinion, and they are falsely attributing it to others because either: A) they assume without basis that their peers share their opinion, B) they are making extrapolations to a population of hundreds of thousands of people based on a sample size of maybe three, C) they are too much of a coward to take ownership of their opinion, or D) they are a troll or bad actor.
I mean, aren't you doing the same thing here?
Arcana55 said: I'm not arguing the health industry in the US isn't broken, but thinking that murdering executives will fix it is moronic. And I think attributing "glee at the death of a human being" to a group of people who's job it is to save lives is extraordinarily insulting.
Also, think about it: Yes, medical staff have a duty to save people's lives, and they have most probably chosen their professions due to their desire to help people. Why would you think the majority of them would not celebrate the death of the kind of parasite that has prevented them from doing so? How many people have doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals (and I mean actual health care professionals, not the bloodsuckers in health companies' C-suites or their shareholders) watched suffer or even die just because some fucker in a suit decided that saving a life wouldn't provide a good enough ROI?
Seems like another bunch of 'healthcare providers' suddenly decided to roll back a decision to not pay for anesthesia (presumably patients could be provided a leather belt or stiff brandy- that they must pay for themselves) a few days after Tommy boy got iced. Encouraging results I think- in more ways than one.
EDIT: On a whim I decided to go to r/medicine and this post absolutely destroyed me.
True, this might be some person just posting their doctor fantasies, but if it's not? Then this is an actual opinion by an actual health care worker on what UHC has put them through. This is what someone who is actually dedicated to saving lives feels when profit is put above patients. I'll be honest: when all this started, I was prepared to pitch into the shooter's GoFundMe if they ever got caught and somehow lived long enough to see a trial. Not anymore. Now?
Counter argument: Osama Bin Laden killed thousands of Americans indirectly through his orders, and nobody cried when he died because he had a family and it might have been technically illegal. Brian Thompson has indirectly killed several 9/11s worth of Americans, so why should we be burdened by his death?
Let's just simply say “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
Marching the streets and holding signs aren't effective anymore when the rich can just sit in their skyscrapers and not even acknowledge the protest happening, when they're so detached they will flat out say on live TV they don't care if people, even employees of their own companies, have to die just so they can endlessly grab more money and power that they don't even know what to do with.
This is just sending a wake-up call the way they'll finally fucking understand.
This is just sending a wake-up call the way they'll finally fucking understand.
Yes and no. The immediate response was to increase spending on security for executives, but this won't produce change in the manner of actually changing the system in the long run. They'll simply make themselves harder targets, which is easy enough for them.
Christ, this comments section is exactly why Democrats lost the election. Leftists and Liberals can't agree on anything for some fucking reason. Republicans were united in their stupidity and ignorance, but they were at least united.
Christ, this comments section is exactly why Democrats lost the election. Leftists and Liberals can't agree on anything for some fucking reason. Republicans were united in their stupidity and ignorance, but they were at least united.
They've done everything they can to make Trump look better by comparison.
Leftists and Liberals can't agree on anything for some fucking reason.
Wow, it's almost like they're two completely different ideologies with dramatically opposing views on capitalism and government intervention in the marketplace. Who could have possibly anticipated that they would ever disagree with one another?
Wow, it's almost like they're two completely different ideologies with dramatically opposing views on capitalism and government intervention in the marketplace. Who could have possibly anticipated that they would ever disagree with one another?
No, obviously leftism is when the government does stuff, and the more stuff it does, the more leftism there is!
The health insurance company isn't going to check your voter registration before they turn you down, they're just going to turn you down. hating them isn't a partisan thing
Anyone wanna bet that these CEO's will now spend more money on security when they could have spent less on cleaning up their act?
I suspect if you did the number crunching, you'd find they'd still see they're making more money the current way even with paying more for security than not. Remember, it's the kind of number crunching that finds human-life expendable for company profits. Look at Goodyear for example where they had found it was more logical to 1) relabel low speed utility vehicle tires as highway speed RV tires, and then 2) found it logical to spend like over a decade covering up the deaths caused by their tires failing at highway speeds through settlements with NDAs so the families of victims couldn't be aware of each other to turn the case into a class action lawsuit.
People are acting like this is actually going to fix anything.
You can't deny that it definitely opened a can of worms. The most important thing to come out of this is the reaction to the public's reaction. People are definitely taking notice of the lack of remorse for the victim and the praise for the shooter. I am not justifying violence, but I'm not sure what other event would climb its way to the top of the press so easily and get people talking/taking sides so quickly. And it only takes 1 copycat for people to start seeing this as a "trend" against CEOs. Again, not condoning violence, just how I think things would play out. But as a side note I do condone violence
I've read rumors the CEO may have been willing to testify against certain parties regarding insider trading. Probably in exchange for having his own crimes forgiven. So the shooter was hardly an activist.
I've read rumors the CEO may have been willing to testify against certain parties regarding insider trading. Probably in exchange for having his own crimes forgiven. So the shooter was hardly an activist.
Ministers, elected presidents and now a CEO. This could be the beginning for a capitalism restructure. They can't hide from a global population with just some body guards forever.
I told you Elon acting like a cool rich with people is only a false appearance. He is not different to a Rockefeller, just trying to cover his arse. They have been told before they are at risk if poverty keeps increasing. They are also afraid of a possible revolution against them.
