UHC CEO Gunned Down in Midtown Manhattan

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He was caught on video lying in wait and committing the murder. He’s toast.

Someone that bears a vague resemblance in low light. AI can fake video now. Nothing is real, nothing is certain.

Please. There was also the eye witness woman drinking coffee who ran.

Eye witness in low light. Practically useless.

Sure…keep telling yourself that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Death panels and budgeting decides.

That which is not sustainable, ceases to exist.

Like Canada when it went bankrupt in 1999. And it might again.

We don't need panels. Just stop care for anyone over 60.

That’s not how any country’s healthcare / national insurance panels work. It’s all based on probability of recovery & longevity vs costs.

They're wrong. Past 60 there's very little opportunity for them to make up the cost to society. Money down the drain.

Except that they've already paid in for 60 years. Should there not be some return for them?

Yes, their taxes got them those 60 years despite the mess they left for future generations.

It'll be a great day when you turn 60 and have some real life experiences behind you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Death panels and budgeting decides.

That which is not sustainable, ceases to exist.

Like Canada when it went bankrupt in 1999. And it might again.

We don't need panels. Just stop care for anyone over 60.

That’s not how any country’s healthcare / national insurance panels work. It’s all based on probability of recovery & longevity vs costs.

They're wrong. Past 60 there's very little opportunity for them to make up the cost to society. Money down the drain.

Except that they've already paid in for 60 years. Should there not be some return for them?

Yes, their taxes got them those 60 years despite the mess they left for future generations.

It'll be a great day when you turn 60 and have some real life experiences behind you.

That's a very selfish attitude. I don't want to live after I become a drain on society. You must be a boomer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Death panels and budgeting decides.

That which is not sustainable, ceases to exist.

Like Canada when it went bankrupt in 1999. And it might again.

We don't need panels. Just stop care for anyone over 60.

That’s not how any country’s healthcare / national insurance panels work. It’s all based on probability of recovery & longevity vs costs.

They're wrong. Past 60 there's very little opportunity for them to make up the cost to society. Money down the drain.

Except that they've already paid in for 60 years. Should there not be some return for them?

Yes, their taxes got them those 60 years despite the mess they left for future generations.

It'll be a great day when you turn 60 and have some real life experiences behind you.

That's a very selfish attitude. I don't want to live after I become a drain on society. You must be a boomer.

So you just expect people to kill themselves after 65?

[Anonymous]

Let the illegals use up all the ER and medical care resources. And all those chain migration family sponsor visas. No one pays in anything- and certainly not for years or decades- and can start using all public resources and systems asap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Death panels and budgeting decides.

That which is not sustainable, ceases to exist.

Like Canada when it went bankrupt in 1999. And it might again.

We don't need panels. Just stop care for anyone over 60.

That’s not how any country’s healthcare / national insurance panels work. It’s all based on probability of recovery & longevity vs costs.

They're wrong. Past 60 there's very little opportunity for them to make up the cost to society. Money down the drain.

Except that they've already paid in for 60 years. Should there not be some return for them?

Yes, their taxes got them those 60 years despite the mess they left for future generations.

It'll be a great day when you turn 60 and have some real life experiences behind you.

That's a very selfish attitude. I don't want to live after I become a drain on society. You must be a boomer.

So you just expect people to kill themselves after 65?

No, they just shouldn't be getting non-trivial medical treatment after about 60.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Death panels and budgeting decides.

That which is not sustainable, ceases to exist.

Like Canada when it went bankrupt in 1999. And it might again.

We don't need panels. Just stop care for anyone over 60.

That’s not how any country’s healthcare / national insurance panels work. It’s all based on probability of recovery & longevity vs costs.

They're wrong. Past 60 there's very little opportunity for them to make up the cost to society. Money down the drain.

Except that they've already paid in for 60 years. Should there not be some return for them?

Government spends all your tax money immediately. It doesn't save for the future because there are always going to be taxpayers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let the illegals use up all the ER and medical care resources. And all those chain migration family sponsor visas[/b]. No one pays in anything- and certainly not for years or decades- and can start using all public resources and systems asap.

[b]

Like Melania’s parents and sister? Melania hooked an American, got US citizenship, and then brought her entire family over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Death panels and budgeting decides.

That which is not sustainable, ceases to exist.

Like Canada when it went bankrupt in 1999. And it might again.

We don't need panels. Just stop care for anyone over 60.

That’s not how any country’s healthcare / national insurance panels work. It’s all based on probability of recovery & longevity vs costs.

They're wrong. Past 60 there's very little opportunity for them to make up the cost to society. Money down the drain.

Except that they've already paid in for 60 years. Should there not be some return for them?

Yes, their taxes got them those 60 years despite the mess they left for future generations.

It'll be a great day when you turn 60 and have some real life experiences behind you.

That's a very selfish attitude. I don't want to live after I become a drain on society. You must be a boomer.

So you just expect people to kill themselves after 65?

No, they just shouldn't be getting non-trivial medical treatment after about 60.

You have posted this on every thread for years. You’re an outlier, thankfully,

[Anonymous]

I look forward to Luigi getting the needle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On his way to the annual investors' conference. Cannot believe it.

https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/unitedhealth-ceo-brian-thomspon-shot-killed-c0358c5e?mod=hp_lead_pos1

Anniversary of Luigi’s hit and run.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let the illegals use up all the ER and medical care resources. And all those chain migration family sponsor visas[/b]. No one pays in anything- and certainly not for years or decades- and can start using all public resources and systems asap.

[b]

Like Melania’s parents and sister? Melania hooked an American, got US citizenship, and then brought her entire family over.

Did they all come over illiterate, unhealthy, uneducated, and unskilled?
Pop out 5 anchor babies, put them all on welfare via SAA, and work for cash in the black market, remit half of it, never learn driving rules in America, use the ER room at Holy Cross non stop and use fraudulent IDs?

Maybe that’s why, plus the fact that the family sponsor list isn’t 20 years wait like it is for every SE Asian and Central American country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Death panels and budgeting decides.

That which is not sustainable, ceases to exist.

Like Canada when it went bankrupt in 1999. And it might again.

We don't need panels. Just stop care for anyone over 60.

That’s not how any country’s healthcare / national insurance panels work. It’s all based on probability of recovery & longevity vs costs.

They're wrong. Past 60 there's very little opportunity for them to make up the cost to society. Money down the drain.

Except that they've already paid in for 60 years. Should there not be some return for them?

Yes, their taxes got them those 60 years despite the mess they left for future generations.

It'll be a great day when you turn 60 and have some real life experiences behind you.

That's a very selfish attitude. I don't want to live after I become a drain on society. You must be a boomer.

Haha. You're such a liar or a troll. So when are you going to off yourself PP, because you already sound like you're a drain on everybody around you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let the illegals use up all the ER and medical care resources. And all those chain migration family sponsor visas. No one pays in anything- and certainly not for years or decades- and can start using all public resources and systems asap.

Well this is wrong and should be an easy bi-partisan fix, but nobody is listening to anyone any more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I predict jury nullification. United Health can afford to pays its executives $$$$$$$$$$$$, so it can deny $$$ insurance claims. Didn't feel sorry for the man then and still don't feel sorry for him or his family because they benefited from screwing people who paid hefty premiums for their claims to be denied.

There's nearly no chance for jury nullification unless the defense can come up with something that lets jurors argue reasonable doubt, even if it is a stretch. Otherwise the most you'll get is a hung jury, with him remaining remanded pending retrial.

Every one has an insurance horror story and it doesn't have to be United.

And most people know murder is wrong.

+1 I can't believe the people in this forum who rationalize breaking the law in various ways, including murder. Disgusting.

Murder is wrong, but let's not pretend like "the law" is based around morality or ethics. The UHC CEO may have been doing legal things, but far from moral or ethical. Luigi has blood on his hands, yes. But far, FAR less than the guy he killed.

That's an interesting justice system.

Well, our justice system is an interesting justice system.

Your idea of justice is like the Wild West-- just shoot the bad guys. Seems you're okay with everyone executing those they think wronged or hurt them.

The bag, the convos and the evidence are all admissible. Gun, notebook, bullets, note to his parents, the Fed note, all his cash.

This pretrial is a joke and waste of time and resources; there are a myriad reasons to interrogate him; check his person and bag after what happened in Manhattan.

And yes he was sitting at the McDs for 40 mins in his laptop reading all about himself by the time the cops came. Then he started eating.