UHC CEO Gunned Down in Midtown Manhattan

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m amazed at the number of people who think health insurance is the main problem, as if the hospitals just honest businessmen submitting bills for their services and the docs as well. The whole system is a sh&t show. Cardiologist in the US make like a half a million, in the Uk it’s like £150K.

People should be mad at their legislators for allowing it to get this way. This is not to say that insurers don’t have their problems but they are but one cog in the wheel of grift and dysfunction.

Cardiologists actually provide an extremely valuable service. Insurance companies suck money out of the system. Do you really not see the difference?

In many cases they keep the system from ripping people off and in many cases make sure that people don’t get the wrong med or unnecessary procedures. I know you think your doctor is the bees knees and would never do anything unethical or wrong but you would be wrong. Consider the fact that so many physician groups have sold out to PE who are managing care by the way in which they manage the practice. The docs didn’t sell because they are concerned about the good of the patients - they wanted a paycheck. There are no innocents in this game.

Yep. Private equity is all over specialized surgical and medical groups …. these doctors are money machines. Cha Ching! $$ Smart doctors know how to game the system. Spend 15 minutes with a patient, quick exam, order scans. Done. Next!

Even large hospital groups order needless scans, ultrasounds, blood work, procedures, unnecessary surgeries…it’s insane.

Yes—I’m generally pro doctor but anyone who thinks that doctors don’t need checks on spending is naive. The nursing homes are notorious for ordering useless tests and therapies to pad their profits. And lots of doctors will just write whatever test or script their patient wants because it’s easier than arguing or because they are making a profit (remember the opioid epidemic?). Everyone would like to have great doctors who only prescribe medically necessary stuff and only do so in their best interest, and have affordable health care that covers all medically necessary treatments, even if those treatments cost millions of dollars a year for a single condition. But it’s not reality. Yes, let’s crack down on the bad actors, but this generalized hate for health insurance providers is just so naive and dangerous. Does anyone remember the world before health insurance? Working class people just died if they got anything that needed more than a doctors visit. Pooling of risk is a good thing—that’s what insurance is. But insurance companies have to follow their written policies.

There are monsters at every level of the system. This hospital allowed this doctor to misdiagnose and kill patients because he made money for them.

The opioid epidemic is due in part to physicians being courted by pharma sales people and the fact that no one was watching what was going on so the pill mills were allowed to dispense like crazy and Medicaid just paid. I’m not saying health insurance companies are angels by any means but there are plenty of bad actors out there.


https://www.propublica.org/article/thomas-weiner-montana-st-peters-hospital-oncology

Also look at the stories about patients being kept in psych wards so that the monstrous doctors could keep billing insurance. It's sickening. The whole system from insurance to hospital to medical staff, is corrupt.

And Americans need to stop thinking this country has the most envied medical system in the world, because anyone who has actually traveled and needed medical care in other countries, knows it's BS. I have friends currently traveling to a couple of other countries for advanced medical treatments that the US doesn't offer.

You are delusional. I am a doctor we are being forced by insurance companies to release patients before they are ready and /or before we think they are stabilized enough to stay out of the hospital. Sure- there may be some exceptions, but trust me, docs get no pay outs from this. Our reimbursements and pay are declining, but we keep working. We see NPs and PAs constantly ordering unnecessary tests and prescribing controlled stimulants because that’s what patients want and they don’t have the background and education to know better , and we’re constantly having to fix it. You all know nothing about health care and it’s so evident. These for profit entities are killing us and you. And you just take it and try to lay blame on the very people (and the only people) working to keep you alive.

Agree. Except for the doctors that are either self employed internists overseeing a nursing home or part owner in some cases. Those are some major schemers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree. Their chance to get him was in the first couple of hours after the murder. He’s long gone. And the NYPD looks completely incompetent. They haven’t even figured out this guy’s name and they have a pretty clear picture and DNA.

They may know his name but are not showing their hand yet. I’m not sure they have his DNA. Maybe he planted the water bottle on purpose. Even if they have DNA, it’s irrelevant unless he’s in a database somewhere. If he is a foreigner, he wouldn’t be. Even as an American, if he has no prior criminal record, why would his DNA be in any system?

If he has some dumb relative that has done one of the DNA services (Ancestry, 23 and me..) they may find him. Note: people are so stupid for sending their DNA into these services

Agree 1000% - exactly why I've never done this.

Blackstone acquired Ancestry:
https://www.blackstone.com/news/press/blackstone-completes-acquisition-of-ancestry-leading-online-family-history-business-for-4-7-billion/

23 & Me may also be sold:
https://www.npr.org/2024/09/25/nx-s1-5123633/23andme-is-in-trouble-what-happens-to-all-the-dna-data

[Anonymous]

Conservative Inc grifters got their marching orders: This isn’t justifiable non-partisan populist sentiment, only godless radical leftists are celebrating such a thing!

This has tapped into something on both sides of the aisle and the “ruling elite” is very afraid. A lot of money and choreography to gaslight and swat this genuine anger down.

[Anonymous]

No need to have DNA to identify the shooter. He left enough evidence with the cameras.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Conservative Inc grifters got their marching orders: This isn’t justifiable non-partisan populist sentiment, only godless radical leftists are celebrating such a thing!

This has tapped into something on both sides of the aisle and the “ruling elite” is very afraid. A lot of money and choreography to gaslight and swat this genuine anger down.

This is literally how all insurance (health, car, life, homeowners) works. I can't believe this moron thinks this is an original thought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they find the guy it is going to be hard to find 12 people who are going to unanimously find him guilty.

I imagine one person goes with jury nullification and votes not guilty.

Don't be ridiculous.

Don't be so naive. Look at postings all over the internet and try to find ones that are sympathetic to the CEO. While most people (hopefully) don't agree in killing, the vast majority of people are not sad at all. The sentiment is so strong it is going to be hard to find an impartial jury. Are they going to exclude everyone who has ever had an issue with health insurance or knows someone who has had an issue? Not many around.

I’d be impartial. The law is you can’t kill people and not that it’s okay to kill evil people.

The ceo was a bad person engaging in insider trading and also was killed. This does not make the killing right.

We have courts to serve justice, which is not supposed to be served through gun shots.

It’s concerning people can’t hold opposing and complicated ideas in their heads.

Agree with this but the problem is that CEOs are rarely held accountable for their actions. Why aren’t members of the Sackler family in prison?

[Anonymous]

Interesting watching the media on this…the Atlantic’s first article was titled something like “Fury at the Healthcare System is justified (murder is not). Then it was changed to “the coursening of American Society”, then pulled from the front page altogether. I believe you can still google search it but very interesting it’s no longer front and center. I agree that corporations are putting their thumb on the scale of the media narrative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they find the guy it is going to be hard to find 12 people who are going to unanimously find him guilty.

I imagine one person goes with jury nullification and votes not guilty.

Don't be ridiculous.

Don't be so naive. Look at postings all over the internet and try to find ones that are sympathetic to the CEO. While most people (hopefully) don't agree in killing, the vast majority of people are not sad at all. The sentiment is so strong it is going to be hard to find an impartial jury. Are they going to exclude everyone who has ever had an issue with health insurance or knows someone who has had an issue? Not many around.

I’d be impartial. The law is you can’t kill people and not that it’s okay to kill evil people.

The ceo was a bad person engaging in insider trading and also was killed. This does not make the killing right.

We have courts to serve justice, which is not supposed to be served through gun shots.

It’s concerning people can’t hold opposing and complicated ideas in their heads.

Agree with this but the problem is that CEOs are rarely held accountable for their actions. Why aren’t members of the Sackler family in prison?

+1. When you cut off access to justice through legal means, vigilantism or at least celebration of the deaths of the people you know will never be held accountable is the inevitable result. Those are actually opposing ideas as well; I'm capable of believing both that murder is wrong and that in this case the murder was a rudimentary kind of justice for a man who was never going to face justice for the people he killed. That doesn't make it "right," but of the however many people were murdered that day, it's closer to the right end of the spectrum than most of the others.

[Anonymous]

I mean if you think the CEO had it coming then you have to think that all the people who work at UHC should be killed also. They all have a part in it. They all made the choice to work there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Holy cow, he is gorgeous.

Seriously. If he gets caught, my prediction is:

1. People donate millions to pay his legal fees
2. He’s convicted but judges sentences him to something like 1 day.
3. Once he’s free, he starts an OF. He’ll be the highest earning person on OF within 24 hours.

Which means they aren’t bringing him alive and giving him a platform.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they find the guy it is going to be hard to find 12 people who are going to unanimously find him guilty.

I imagine one person goes with jury nullification and votes not guilty.

Don't be ridiculous.

Don't be so naive. Look at postings all over the internet and try to find ones that are sympathetic to the CEO. While most people (hopefully) don't agree in killing, the vast majority of people are not sad at all. The sentiment is so strong it is going to be hard to find an impartial jury. Are they going to exclude everyone who has ever had an issue with health insurance or knows someone who has had an issue? Not many around.

I’d be impartial. The law is you can’t kill people and not that it’s okay to kill evil people.

The ceo was a bad person engaging in insider trading and also was killed. This does not make the killing right.

We have courts to serve justice, which is not supposed to be served through gun shots.

It’s concerning people can’t hold opposing and complicated ideas in their heads.

Agree with this but the problem is that CEOs are rarely held accountable for their actions. Why aren’t members of the Sackler family in prison?

+1. When you cut off access to justice through legal means, vigilantism or at least celebration of the deaths of the people you know will never be held accountable is the inevitable result. Those are actually opposing ideas as well; I'm capable of believing both that murder is wrong and that in this case the murder was a rudimentary kind of justice for a man who was never going to face justice for the people he killed. That doesn't make it "right," but of the however many people were murdered that day, it's closer to the right end of the spectrum than most of the others.

+1. Why are the only remedies in this situations civil (ie: money the corporation pays) and not criminal (ie: time in jail for the wrong doer?) These companies legally indemnify their top execs for civil issues and it takes away their moral compass, if they had one to begin with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interesting watching the media on this…the Atlantic’s first article was titled something like “Fury at the Healthcare System is justified (murder is not). Then it was changed to “the coursening of American Society”, then pulled from the front page altogether. I believe you can still google search it but very interesting it’s no longer front and center. I agree that corporations are putting their thumb on the scale of the media narrative.

The WP editorial board (who was told? Or wouldn’t? endorse a presidential candidate) wrote a whole column on why the response is uncalled for and that health insurances are a complex matter. Last I read, the comment section was tearing their arguments to pieces and saying they missed the point. I agree that his murder was wrong, plain and simple. But it’s interesting to compare the media vs the internet’s response. One is beholden to the rich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If they find the guy it is going to be hard to find 12 people who are going to unanimously find him guilty.

I imagine one person goes with jury nullification and votes not guilty.

This is a horrific conclusion, which unfortunately, I believe may be true.

Jeff rightly blogged about how shocked he was at the number of DCUMAD posters who celebrated this cold-blooded murder, and some even encouraged more ruthless murders of CEOs who are simply doing their job.

Some of you are demonstrating true mental illness (dangerous, murderous), mental illness in this regard.

To those people: I pray you get the professional help you clearly need and turn away from supporting murder. Seriously.

UHC likely would deny it

HAHAHAHA gold star for this comment.

[Anonymous]

SNL’s weekend update quipped that America’s response to the shooting was telling:

1. Our healthcare system sucks

2. Grrrlll, that shooter is hot.

You know our society has devolved to a bad place when John Fettermen is the voice of reason. He’s been the best spokesperson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a strange quote.

How does it help to broadcast you are not sharing the killer’s name so he doesn’t have an advantage?? How does sharing the name give the killer an advantage??

“Adams was quoted by the Post as saying the police were withholding the suspect's name for now to deny him any advantage.”

“We don’t want to release that now,” the mayor said. “If you do, you are basically giving a tip to the person we are seeking and we do not want to give him an upper hand at all. Let him continue to believe he can hide behind the mask."


https://www.reuters.com/world/us/nyc-mayor-says-suspect-identified-unitedhealth-executives-murder-ny-post-reports-2024-12-07/

They also need to build a case to convict. So that’s sometimes why they watch before they strike.

DP, but I don’t see how they’re keeping an advantage if they are telling him they know who he is. He already knows his own name. The only people who don’t know it are the public, but they have now announced they are onto him.