Anonymous wrote:Serious question. I have to ask, now that the CEO murder in Manhattan thread has exceeded 200 pages, plus

- Professor Zenkus at Colombia has publicly celebrated the murder;

https://www.wnct.com/news/national/killing-of-unitedhealthcare-ceo-uncorks-anger-at-insurance-industry/


And WaPo columnist Taylor Lorenz said the murder “feels like victory.”

https://www.rawstory.com/piers-morgan-2670403712/

I am shocked at these views. So I have to ask the obvious here:

- do you support murdering CEOs, as others apparently do?

I do not. But I’m also not weeping over this guy, whose greedy policies negatively impact so many people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What do CEOs do anyway? Send out stupid emails trying to be inspirational? Sit in meetings all day? They seem like a waste of money.

Thompson was being DOJ investigated for serious crimes. So this CEO was apparently a very bad man.

It's not the killer's place to kill him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He was radicalized by pain. I believe it. I read somewhere that he couldn’t have a normal sexual life due to his back pain. That’s a lot of frustration and nowhere to put it.

Radicalized by back pain. Oh, to be a man.

'My life got difficult, if I kill someone it will get better.'

+1

No.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He was radicalized by pain. I believe it. I read somewhere that he couldn’t have a normal sexual life due to his back pain. That’s a lot of frustration and nowhere to put it.

Yep. All you need to know about his motivation.

He hit the gym pretty hard, plus rock climbed and had zero problems getting around NYC. I’m assuming he is able to urinate without a catheter as well. He definitely is able to be intimate. This is just a spun narrative

I do not support vigilantism. So answer is resounding no.

I do find the turn the discussion of this particular murder took fascinating. But the guy who shot him committed a horrible crime and needs to be in jail.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, but I support putting CEOs on trial for murder if they knowingly and wrongfully deny care that leads to death. I also support putting CEOs on trial for assault if they do the same and it leads to harm or insurmountable pain, especially in children.

The murderer was wrong. We should do what is right.

I agree with this. They want the big bucks, they should have skin in the game.

Exactly.

Anonymous wrote:What do CEOs do anyway? Send out stupid emails trying to be inspirational? Sit in meetings all day? They seem like a waste of money.

Thompson was being DOJ investigated for serious crimes. So this CEO was apparently a very bad man.

Anonymous wrote:No, but I support putting CEOs on trial for murder if they knowingly and wrongfully deny care that leads to death. I also support putting CEOs on trial for assault if they do the same and it leads to harm or insurmountable pain, especially in children.

The murderer was wrong. We should do what is right.

I agree with this. They want the big bucks, they should have skin in the game.

Kind of.

What do CEOs do anyway? Send out stupid emails trying to be inspirational? Sit in meetings all day? They seem like a waste of money.

Anonymous wrote:I think it's wrong for anyone to murder or your torture as a blanket statement.

However I'd ask the question back: is the healthcare insurance industry specifically right in denying 33% of all claims based on a system (AI) that is statistically proven wrong awhile innocents have died and/or suffered immensely? If so, why have they been able to continue without reprimand?

I do know that the US over treats, over tests, and does more unnecessary procedures than any other country. So while 33% of claims may get denied, plenty of unnecessary claims do get reimbursed. Doctors are now in the business of pleasing their patients. If you want a test, or a lab, or a procedure- there is a good chance you will find a doctor what will do it, regardless of it is truly indicated. It’s easier and more profitable for the doctor to say yes to you and then let you handle the billing and be made at insurance if they deny vs writing angry reviews about them “not giving you proper care.” In the age of google and web MD, people are accustomed to telling their dr what they want/need and they don’t like to be told no.

Anonymous wrote:He was radicalized by pain. I believe it. I read somewhere that he couldn’t have a normal sexual life due to his back pain. That’s a lot of frustration and nowhere to put it.

Why's he put it 4000 miles away in NYC?

Brian Thompson didn't cause his pain, and had no power to cure his pain, and didn't interfere with the cure.

The guy that read some tweets online, decided he didn't like Brian, and traveled across the country (in excruciating pain?) to kill him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question. I have to ask, now that the CEO murder in Manhattan thread has exceeded 200 pages, plus

- Professor Zenkus at Colombia has publicly celebrated the murder;

https://www.wnct.com/news/national/killing-of-unitedhealthcare-ceo-uncorks-anger-at-insurance-industry/


And WaPo columnist Taylor Lorenz said the murder “feels like victory.”

https://www.rawstory.com/piers-morgan-2670403712/

I am shocked at these views. So I have to ask the obvious here:

- do you support murdering CEOs, as others apparently do?

Absolutely not - that is extremist.

However I do support policies and laws that require:
- corporate transparency
- removing loop holes for avoiding corporate taxes
- reform of corporate boards to maintain accountability to shareholders and customers such as CEOs not being granted outrageously inflated salaries that are not performance based or commiserate with value brought by CEOs/ CFOs and senior management
- effective antitrust enforcement to prevent anti competitive business practices that harm smaller competitors who hire half of American workers (eg Aetna-CVS driving thousands of smaller independent pharmacies out of business by pricing drug reimbursements to competitors at much lower rates).

Corporate reforms -/ especially of the health insurance sector that has non medical people making medical decisions — are what is needed. Not random vigilantism.

One man random vigilanteism is another man's sovereign regime change operation.

Don't confuse power with legitimacy.

Corporations have no inherent legitimacy. We didn't consent to this.

The Divine Right of Kings is measured by how well the king avoids or survives rebellion.

The tree of Liberty is watered with blood of tyrants

Anonymous wrote:He was radicalized by pain. I believe it. I read somewhere that he couldn’t have a normal sexual life due to his back pain. That’s a lot of frustration and nowhere to put it.

Yep. All you need to know about his motivation.