Love that the entire internet, left, right, authoritarian, liberal, and everyone in-between came out to say “lol, get rekt, oligarch.” Nothing I’ve ever seen has been as unifying as this. Running for office under the banner of beheading CEOs might sincerely get you elected.
I think the powers that be underestimate our thirst for justice. This is the closest thing to justice for the rich we’ve seen in - maybe our lives?
I don’t want to live in a world of vigilante justice but this kind of thing is inevitable when the system fails us for as long as it has.
Removed by mod
I hope we never find out who did it. The killer just becomes this DB Cooper-esque legend who came out of nowhere, kill a CEO, and disappear never to be seen again. And even better, proving the complete and utter incompence of the NYPD, when they can’t manage to catch someone who killed in broad daylight in a city of cameras.
They will find someone on the street and frame them if they can’t find the legit shooter.
Is it preferable to status quo? It may even be morally justifiable. But the world I’d want to live in is one where people like this face justice through the same system you and I would.
the system changes the laws to make this behaviour legal. therefore no crime. no trial. no retribution. lots of profit for investors.
Deny that you know or even saw them. Defend them if they do get caught, through protest, fundraising, bail, etc. Depose those who put them in jail if they are sentenced.
This is the closest thing to justice for the rich we’ve seen in - maybe our lives?
That submarine popping.
Karmic justice sure - aside from the kid who got roped into taking that voyage by his dad. Billionaires hubris treats the world as their plaything, and find out that nature doesn’t care about your net worth
I think that’s more hubris leading to death by misadventure. Ikarus got a little too warm.
As a Brazilian living in Rio de Janeiro (golden handcuff effect), I highly agree. My country sucessfully improved human rights but as a collateral effect, gov’t refuses to build more jails so jail overcrowding resulted in de facto decriminalization of theft, and police releasing criminals just a pair of hours they get caught - and nowadays cops can’t even slap a scumbag in the face because our more important TV channel witch-hunts anyone who does anything that remotely resembles a potentially mild human rights violantion without even making questions to the parts involved, so we who live in the part of the city controlled by the government sometimes try to bring some vigilante justice… out of despair!
As someone that could probably best be described as center-left (guillotine oligarchs yes, UBI yes, abolition of private property and free markets no), I do dare say that not a single common person on the right likes the billionaires either. It’s just that their side of the political isle has been co-opted by the billionaires even worse than the “left” side because being anti-tax and anti-regulation is more useful to billionaires than pro-tax and pro-regulation.
Nah the right has one or three pet billionaires they outright worship.
These one or three pet billionaires have done a lot of image building to achieve this. They’re trying to be the “common man’s billionaire” and “just like us”. Musk spent a decade trying to appear like a nerdy engineer and when people started realizing he’s a shitheel, he pivoted to the “the elites are after me, it’s time for us to stop them together” shtick.
In general, the right (and I mean individual people, NOT politicians) hates billionaires almost as much as we do, but wrongly associates them with the left - but while it’s true that some billionaires are left-wing socially, they’re damn near all right-wing economically, because no billionaire is going to want to have less money.
Yeah the big issue is as you said. Ask someone on the right to name a bad billionaire. They will mention musk, bezos, Tim Cook, but probably only hating cook for being woke and money grubbing. The ones who pull the strings hide themselves. Nobody knows who they are they’re just CEO of x y z. There’s 750+ billionaires in the US, 15 in every state on average (though most of them are in cali, Texas, and ny). And they’ve spent a boatload of money getting very smart people to convince everyone they can that the problem is Joe Biden, or Kamala Harris. Tribalism is strong, and unfortunately people just lap it up.
3 in every state
On average…
There’s a bit like this in Daredevil. They’ve been tracing some shadowy acts back to Wilson Fisk, a horrible rich man nobody’s heard of. A top journalist is preparing an article on his actions based on circumstantial evidence.
Fisk, reading the situation and retaliating, opens a press conference introducing himself and voluntarily makes his name known to get on people’s good side.
deleted by creator
You don’t know Elon musk or the Koch brothers? There’s three off the cuff
For real? On top of Musk and Kochs, how about Miriam Adelson?
Liberals worship Gates, and Soros. Liberals are not actually left, they are the poor imitation we get in the states. Gates and Soros have spent permits for them rehabilitating their image and the liberals are lapping it up.
And the center loves Buffet and Bloomberg
Billionaires have the US political system fully in the pocket
I’ve never seen anyone worship Soros nearly as much as conservatives like to pretend. Gates was looked up to by a lot more people for a while, sure, thanks to his charity work, but let’s be honest here, he only does that to make himself more palatable and less likely to be guillotined. He was trying to hide the fact that he’s a gigantic asshole like any other billionaire. Cherry on top, it turns out he was buddy-buddy with Epstein too.
guillotine oligarchs yes, UBI yes
That’s called center left now? I thought that was far left.
Center left is what we used to have after WWII.
Far left is what we worked for during the labour movement. Or so I thought.
If you aren’t working towards the establishment of Socialism, you can hardly be called “far left.”
Getting rid of the oligarchs and implementing UBI would be the first step before you nationalize key industries and introduce worker co-ops.
Imo both above is what I call far left without the whole flip the game board and starting again, in my experience saying that really scares people.
Capitalists can’t be ousted by asking nicely, that happens with revolutionary pressure. Since you can’t do step 1, UBI would only come alongside austerity measures as a way to “simplify government” and erode social programs. You also can’t translate that to nationalizing key industries either, let alone worker coops. We have hundreds of years of history telling us this.
Secondly, revolution isn’t “flipping the gane board and starting again,” it’s a wresting of control from Capitalists and establishing a new state owned and run by the working class, in its interests. Industry must be preserved and carried forward, and that doesn’t include immediately siezing all industry but doing so with respect to the degree that sectors and entities have developed and established effective internal planning, making markets less efficient vectors for growth and public ownership and central planning superceding it.
You also can’t translate that to nationalizing key industries either, let alone worker coops. We have hundreds of years of history telling us this.
I don’t agree with this. Worker coops exists in many places in Europe, and in said continent, some key industries are heavily controlled by the government.
In my country, Canada, we socialized healthcare without any revolution.
Down south, they had the labour movement that gave us the 40 hour week, the weekend and labour laws all throughout unionization and putting pressure on the capitalist class without “revolutionary pressure”, unless unionization is what you mean by revolutionary pressure. If so, then I agree.
You’re ignoring that these advancements in labor movements came as concessions from the bourgeoisie in the context of trying to prevent what happened in Russia from happening in Canada and the US.
You’re thinking eu not us. Overton window shifts in the us
There’s a funny hodgepodge of ideology here… “Guillotine oligarchs” sounds pretty cool, invokes the French Revolution, which was radical left, at the time. But then the unwillingness to abolish private property is either an erroneous conflation of “private” and “personal” or an unwillingness to actually change the system that produces the oligarchs.
It’s like bailing out the boat but when someone says “patch the hole” your like “but we need the hole!”
No, it’s more like I know we are not ready to have the patch the hole conversation.
I rather bail out the boat and during that time, when people slowly realize that these solutions work and have merit, and when people stop being scared of the word socialism, then it would be pragmatic to talk about patching the hole.
Before that, talking about patching the hole might actually be counter productive as most people don’t have critical thinking and would be turned off by “radical” solutions.
The biggest issue with implementing socialism today imo is people not realizing the solutions can be beneficial. I rather focus on socialists solutions that are “low hanging fruit” so people warm up to the idea.
Yes you have to consider who you’re talking to but I think a lot of us are ready to talk about patching the hole.
As a radical leftist I’m certainly not against bailing the boat, I just acknowledge that this is a temporary solution. Like, minimum wage needs to be high enough that people can work a reasonable number of hours, afford rent, and still have time to read Marx.
The minimum wage hike is still important, it’s just not the end game. If you’re saying you’re not interested in patching the hole, that sounds like a problem. If you’re saying “this hole won’t be patched for a while, but some day we’ll get there. In the meantime, bail like hell.” then, we are comrades.
Private property ≠ personal property. Private property is mostly owned by businesses and corporations, not a person.
As we can see in the US, housing should never be private property, since the number of units that have sat empty for at least 12 months outnumbers our homeless population by a factor of over 70:1 counting all residential types (apartments, condos, duplexes.) If you only count single family detached homes, those still outnumber the homeless population by a factor of 30:1
The left is not pro “all private property abolished”. Only " all private property of the means of production "
Or, when someone says “abolish private property” they’re not talking about your toothbrush.
In this context, private property is the stuff you can use to generate capital. Personal property is your toothbrush, your phone, clothes, furniture, bike, car, house etc.
If you own a second house for rental income, that’s private property. The house you just live in is personal property.
Not all second homes are private property necessarily. If you work out of it then it’s personal property, like if you’re using it as a vacation rental and doing all the cleaning and maintenance yourself. If you hire someone else to do the work for you then it becomes private property. My preferred way of explaining the distinction is that private property is akin to absentee ownership, while personal property is stuff that is in active use by you personally.
if you’re using it as a vacation rental and doing all the cleaning and maintenance yourself. If you hire someone else to do the work for you then it becomes private property
Do you guys even listen to yourself? This makes zero sense.
How can I better explain it to you in a way you will understand?
Yes, they are. Because by destroying the market, you also destroy the toothbrush making machines, and kill the toothbrush makers. Have fun eating the rich, but don’t complain when they end up stuck between your theeth.
When you have no idea what you’re talking about, you should simply say nothing.
How make no billionaires if capitalists allowed to keep owning means of production? Allow to get rich, and then kill?
Here’s a small set of proposals, definitely well thought of and not made up specifically for this comment to make a point:
Start taxing them heavily on wealth INCLUDING unrealized gains once it hits a threshold, but no wealth tax for normal people. Force companies to become either co-ops or publicly traded when certain thresholds are met - and if the founder has too much stock, the taxes on unrealized gains will force them to sell. But if it’s a co-op, don’t count anyone’s share in it as wealth for taxation, only any profit actually paid out by the co-op. My prediction is that companies with high profit per employee (think Steam) will become worker-owned co-ops and companies with lower profit per employee will be publicly traded (think Walmart, except of course Walmart is already publicly traded)
Essentially, I want people to be able to own property, but not own so much that it negatively affects everyone else - everyone should be able to have a primary residence tax-free and I don’t think it’s bad for someone to own a second home either, except that shouldn’t be tax-free. Hoarding property isn’t OK though - that affects everyone else’s housing situation. I don’t like the idea of the state owning all homes - I want there to be strong rules protecting me from being evicted because the state needs a factory built right where my neighbourhood is - but there SHOULD also be state sponsored housing for those who can’t afford their own homes, and they should be easily attainable, and built to a good standard.
I’m okay with people making a plentiful living from passive income off ownership in some company they built, I’m just not okay with it being so much that they make more in a year than the rest of us do in a hundred thousand.
How’s public trading supposed to reduce wealth accumulation? Tesla is publicly traded but Elon still had enough money to buy and ruin Twitter.
Ultra high taxes on unrealized gains. There are no taxes on unrealized gains presently, nor a wealth tax. Which is why if his wealth increases 2x, his taxation… just does not, unless Tesla pays him dividends or a salary.
If Elon had to live with a, say, 99% tax rate on anything above a billion dollars and it included his Tesla stock not just money he has for real, he’d be forced to sell, or go to jail for unpaid taxes.
Why 99% and not 100%? Just to mock them.
I mean… If they’re forced to game the system so they stay just below the “rich” threshold all that extra money has to go somewhere besides their pocket.
Yeah, it’ll go to their friends and family.
You don’t fuck with the tax man. They got Al Capone, they’ll get you, and they’ll get the billionaires, if the laws are right and there’s enough funding to investigate ownership structures of large companies, and the relationships between different major shareholders.
Plus I don’t think anyone has hundreds of family members to hide away hundreds of billions.
Besides, you’d have to divide it before the company gets large enough for it to matter. If your company is worth 800 mill and you’re the only shareholder, selling off half to anyone for anything significantly less than the perceived value of the company, would be investigated as potential tax evasion.
I think a lot of people forget that tax authorities are supposed to look for these cases of hiding wealth. In many civilized countries, they do it for real.
You don’t see the difference between Al Capone, an open criminal who was known for peddling alcohol during prohibition (and probably a murder or three), and billionaires who have enough capital so that they’re basically under the jurisdiction of no individual nation? I’m not even talking about criminality, let’s take that element out completely… You still don’t see the difference between these people?
Also, you understand that the “taxman” is the IRS, right? And that Trump is going to pretty much defund them (probably leave just enough for him to target his perceived enemies).
We’re talking about an imaginary society where shit works and laws are moderately sensible, not 2025 USA.
If said billionaires have assets in other countries, it can be tracked via global anti tax evasion agreements. Even opaque countries are getting more transparent under pressure.
So how come Jeff Bezos pays less tax than drag does?
Because the current tax code is designed for him, not drag. That’s what I would like to change if I was elected benevolent dictator for life with no risk of being deposed by the oligarchs. For the super wealthy, tax all assets, for the super poor, tax nothing and give UBI, and for the working and middle class, a fair progressive income tax, and property tax on homes you don’t live in year-round, but none on your primary residence. In terms of income tax, the tax brackets would go up slowly at first and then ramp up really high. Someone making 100k a year should pay roughly what they pay now, those making less should pay less, and those making 500k+ a year should pay a lot more than they pay now.
Taxes. Tax anything over one billion at 100%
We used t have “progressive” income taxes where higher income paid more, but tax breaks have largely gone to the wealthy over the last half century. While we still have tax brackets, they top off much lower than they used to. More importantly we have a really complex tax code, where some people are able to use loopholes and exceptions, such that many wealthy people pay at a lower rate. Were effectively a “regressive” tax code now
How stop 999 millionaire from buying government and changing tax law?
Limit personally donations by law. Block corporate donations completely. Force donations into a central pool for equal distribution to the parties.
Over one billion? Way too fucking high.
I commented on a politics@lemmy.world post about a bunch of CEOs of publicly traded companies endorsing Kamala Harris saying that it hurts her campaign more than it helps and I got downvoted and had people replying to me saying “um, actually most people look up to CEOs, you’re the one out of touch.” I’m feeling pretty vindicated rn.
Yeah, I’m inclined to agree with you.
Same goes for the Cheney support thing. Felt pretty out of touch to me and I’m not even an American so idk how I get it and the presidential candidate who 1) is American and 2) has a truckload of money being used for voter research, did not.
Running for office under the banner of beheading CEOs might sincerely get you elected.
That would get my vote.
He’s not even an oligarch. He’s the oligarchs’ toadie.
If this reaches the real oligarchs, we might see some change—and backlash but backlash is inevitable if before real change.
I couldn’t agree more, every Trump supporter I’ve seen or talked to is just gleeful about this. Liberal, Conservative, Progressive, Oldschool, it doesn’t matter, everyone in the 99% loves this. The day Brian Thompson was shot put a smile on the face of America.
“Running for office under the banner of beheading CEOs might sincerely get you elected.”
Found my quote of the year.
That’s the one enemy everyone has in common. We need more like those.
It could be the one thing that heals the country.
Everyone except the sh.itjust.works mods who keep tripping over themselves to blabber about how he was such a great man and should be respected for his hard work and stuff.
Ninja edit: wrong instance
I’ve spent 10 minutes searching and came up empty. Any links?
Never mind I got my instances mixed up. https://sh.itjust.works/u/imaqtpie
Dude’s just a communist, and I mean that literally, trying to reconcile the world as it currently is with the way they want it to be. They blame the system, not the man. And there’s definitely an argument to be made there, but I’m too busy reveling
What? The politics of right / liberal free market capitalism creates those! Did anyone read Marx and Piketty?
Except the CEOs would have you beheaded first.
Yeah but there’s nearly 4,000,000 of us for each of them. It’s a numbers game.
Every billionaire has a place called home
They have to fall asleep at some point.
Wow I think this is the first time I’ve seen this meme template used so appropriately.
Are people losing their minds, though? I thought the reaction was pretty muted. There was some celebration, to be sure, but I think that is a pretty rational response.
People seem to be losing their minds in a very positive way
Over 100 Americans have died from diabetes since this guy was shot. Where are the headlines for all of them? Does the fact that they were murdered by a system instead of an individual make their deaths less noteworthy?
Also, there’s something like an average of 47 gun deaths per day (not sure if this site is including suicides, if it is then it’s roughly half without it). But CEOs matter more than Average Joe.
I mean to be fair we’re all here clicking on this one to cheer at the guy. News organizations are going to run stories that get them clicks. While we may consider his death important and noteworthy, none of us are going to click and read an article about how Joe Random died from his heart failure or diabetes.
Maybe not, but we absolutely click on an article detailing just what the fuck e.g. the government is actually going to do about it.
More Americans die every year because of lack of access to medical care than from all of our wars combined.
Can I get a source on this? This sounds like a wild figure!
EDIT: Read the below comments. Wether it’s true or not… Still an unacceptable amount of preventable deaths. We have to do better.
Actual research finds that annual “deaths caused due to lack of insurance” is around 40-50 thousand (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2775760/)
and “if the usa had healthcare as good as france, 101 thousand annual deaths would be prevented” (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-deaths-rankings-idUSN0765165020080108/)
as for war deaths, the ~100 thousand barrier is breached when all wars back to the korean war (1950-1953) are included. Then world war 2 is massively over
so the literal truth of the original statement is that it’s maybe mostly correct if you consider “our wars” to only be wars that the usa played a key role in starting, and only count the last century, but false if not
(eg. the civil war would totally blow the number out of the water, world war 2 would totally blow the number out of the water, and with the unpopular vietnam war it would depend on what exactly your standards of “lack of access to medical care” are)
You’re only considering people without health insurance, not people who have it, but are denied coverage, or can’t afford it even with coverage.
People without health insurance are still victims of our broken health system.
if you totally ignore the second study, sure
3000 a day from heart disease
Actual research finds that annual “deaths caused due to lack of insurance” is around 40-50 thousand
deleted by creator
Different person
We have people like the Joker who give us philosophical questions about our civilization but we’ve yet to see a billionaire use their infinite money and resources to dress up in a suit and mask, fight crime and build a fancy car or jet with exotic weapons to fight real life villains.
we’ve yet to see a billionaire use their infinite money and resources to dress up in a suit and mask, fight crime and build a fancy car or jet with exotic weapons to fight real life villains.
That’s a good thing, though. They may make for great movie and comic book fodder, but in real life, superheroes are pretty much just cops with fewer rules: rather than doing anything about the underlying causes of crime, they just beat up symptoms and theoretical bogeymen.
With his vast resources, Bruce Wayne could reduce crime by 75%+ by investing in prevention, but he prefers beating up people, most of whom are low level goons who probably turned to crime out of desperation, a lack of better options, or varying levels of coercion if not downright brainwashing by the main villains and their middle managers.
Batman would TOTALLY beat up a ton of entry level employees who AREN’T at fault as well as the CEO if insurance profiteering was illegal.
Yeah the reality would be closer to The Boys or The Watchmen.
Just real pieces of shit, likely corporatized with a massive amount of PR keeping them popular while they murder babies and shit.
bruce wayne does in fact fight crime with money too. But it’s not enough, so he also needs to be the batman.
Yeah? What exactly does he spend on that diminishes the underlying causes of crime?
Does he provide housing for the unhoused?
Does he provide food for the food insecure?
Does his company provide a livable wage and reasonable benefits for every employee?
Does the hospital his dad worked at provide care that is free at the point of service?
Does he provide for schools with no cops to initiate the middle school to prison pipeline?
Does he pay for high quality pro bono legal aid for those who would otherwise be steamrolled by representatives of a system that incentivizes convictions regardless of guilt?
Or does he just cut a check to a Dickensian orphanage once in a while?
Um in the cartoon yes he was a huge philanthropist iirc.
yes to all of those…
I’m gonna have to insist on sources for it all if I’m gonna believe you…
To be fair, the Joker was a psychopathic murderer. He wasn’t just laying out deep questions.
“the Joker was a psychopathic murderer”
So a CEO then.
That’s what I’ve been saying. Or they could at least hire and outfit someone to do it. These people don’t have any imagination at all.
No one is losing their minds. Most are quite satisfied with the news
Tell that to the police who decided they actually are going to try this time to find the killer. Tell that to the news juicing the story. They care and they will use your money to do something about it.
Good thing they are out of practice then /s
deleted by creator
Then I advise you stop watching their bullshit news network and find other sources for news. Maybe more grassroots media.
Pretending people don’t watch or shouldn’t watch mainstream media doesn’t change what I said. Also, alot of presumptions to assume I don’t have good trustable news sources (not these guys for sure).
Point is, people watch it and they are being fed a juiced up story and worth recognizing that so that you can continue to operate on the same reality as everyone else. At least enough to not be surprised.
This is stupid because I have not seen one comment from anyone other than other CEOs that is not celebrating his death.
That’s the point. You did it. You discovered the discrepancy. No one cares and Infact we are celebrating. However the police are pumping money into mass manhunt, news is juicing the story nonstop. 10k reward for info. Obviously the powers that be care and care a lot that a CEO got shot. You don’t. I don’t. And yet by time it’s over, hundreds of thousands of dollars will have been spent in man-hours hunting this guy down. An amount of money that would be ridiculous if you or I got shot. No one would care. But a CEO? nYPD pulling out every stop they got.
10k reward for info
Which is frankly hilarious. UnitedHealthCare group grossed $90 billion in the last 12 months and they are offering only a $10,000 reward for help finding the assassin. I bet their next CEO gets 10 to 100 times that much in just a signing bonus.
They probably spent 2mil on researching what amount of money would be enough to engage people without having to give poors a chance at real money.
They even cut corners when offering rewards.
why do I feel like flooding the reward info line with false information like we always do with the abortion manhunt forms.
10k reward for info.
Isn’t that standard for info on a murder? I feel like I’ve heard this before. Maybe it’s usually “up to” 10k. Idk.
Probably not on Lemmy but media did
deleted by creator
Which one isn’t?
Well… not OWNED, but fully funded by.
I’m out of the loop, who died now?
The CEO of United Healthcare was shot the other day
Ty
One death is a tragedy, 16m deaths is a statistic.
One ceo death is a targeted assassination. Multiple ceo deaths is a revolution.
16m deaths is a profit margin
16M deathllars
Good job he died really innit, cos those medical bills would’ve been a bit pricey!
I’d be willing to bet his health package was mostly paid for as part of his compensation.
Only mostly?
Meh, I feel indifferent. Like I’m neither happy nor sad.
Funny thing about these CEOs is that they are universally hated across the political spectrum.
Kamala bragged on the campaign trail about how many CEO endorsements she had. That worked great!
LOLOL she did? I didn’t pay attention to the news too often because the news is too depressing, but if she did, that’s just extra dumb. Like both democrats and republicans from progressives to magats, they all have a dislike for CEOs of big corporations (generally speaking, I know there are exceptions like the Elon worship within the maga movement). What the fuck is that compaign strategy?
Yes, she made it very clear that she was the institutional favorite.
I was thinking today that I hate how emotionless I’ve become about this sort of stuff. I wasn’t this way 8 years ago.
Are you confused? CEOs are like the cheerleaders of capitalism, right liberals got to love them?
Everyone is losing their minds because they’re afraid there’ll be a run on popcorn, not because anyone will miss a waste of space healthcare CEO.
If people don’t feel like we can make things better with negotiation, this is where it goes. I’m not up for pretending I didn’t see this coming.
This may be good time to be an experienced professional body guard, because there’s a lot of healthcare CEOs left and no way was the alleged attacker (I didn’t see shit!) the only person they’ve hurt.
Repeat after me: healthcare should not be profit driven…
Healthcare should not be profit driven.
You asked me to.
I’m glad that I live in a country with socialized healthcare.
I’m glad for you too. Sometimes I wonder what life would be like if my parents had stayed in one of three countries we lived in before settling in the US.
Insurance is just a bad model for healthcare.
I don’t have any problem with hospital workers being fairly compensated. They have difficult jobs, and doctors are highly skilled and have expensive student loans to pay off. But the cost of care in the US is astronomical compared to any other industrialized nation.
Uhh, correct me if I’m wrong, but the total population of America is 335m. If 16m people are dying DAILY, your entire country will be dead by Christmas.
If a 20th of the population dropped dead overnight, I would like to think that any nation would panic.
They may mean tomorrow in the metaphorical sense. Like “the world of tomorrow” kind of sense.
It also could just be an arbitrary/hyperbole number, to show how little the lives of the many mater to the news in comparison to the ceo.
deleted by creator
The number isn’t really the point though, if it’s the case of a metaphor. The trolly problem is usually set up with 1v5 people, but it’s just as arbitrary and hypothetical. The trolly problem could just as easily be set up as 1v100, because the actual number of people on the tracks is to a degree irrelevant to the morality of the question.
This probably isn’t any different.
150 years from now, 100% of us will die of something.
The post never said 16m will die daily. It just says tomorrow. The 16m is probably the number of customers this guy’s company has and denies coverage.
Even more specifically than that, it’s just telling you tomorrow that 16m with a preventable health issue will die, not when or how.
Not correcting you, just adding a little clarification for how i read it
Yes they are telling you tomorrow.
Shit. Maybe I should stay home tomorrow if there’s going to be a purge.
It’s about 9k a day. That’s just all deaths. Medically treatable and avoidable deaths is 624 a day. According to the only numbers I can find, but it’s wonky, so I’ll grant you it may not be precise, but it’s probably a good ballpark number.
Even if it’s one person a day that dies without necessity of a preventable and treatable cause that universal healthcare would have fixed, that’s a lot of deaths. And it’s more than one CEO who likely thought very seriously about the question ‘‘is curing anyone a good business model?’’
Found the explanation:
https://lemmy.world/comment/13802091
Still slightly hyperbole, but somewhat grounded.
Not dead. Just whatever procedure, prescription, or test that was applied for was rejected.
It’s not hyperbole, it’s just wrong to say they died. 16 million denials is bad enough.
The wording of the meme definition isn’t fully correct, but the spirit of it is.
Nice, this was what I was expecting!
I don’t agree with the post, and I think stretching the stats beyond meaning is more harmful than helpful.
Now, if you were to frame this as 16m people NOT being treated for preventable illnesses that would likely be treated in most western countries, that is a damning statistic. It indicates that people are walking around ill/injured for no reason other than greed, draining hospital resources further. It also indicates a lack of quality in care, since those doctors that could be getting their reps in learning to administer specific drugs or procedures don’t get to because “insurance says no lol”.
Only if you don’t replace the dying population. That’s why Republicans banned abortions and Democrats crrated open borders.
It’s a good reminder that the people who oppress us have names and addresses.
And we know their names and surnames, especially for CEOs.
Luckily, bullets outnumber evil CEOs.
Today I decided to collect a small mountain of Facebook posts of people who had claims denied by United Healthcare prior to 2024. I’m not shocked but also I am.
Where’s my pitchfork?
Step right up! Pitchforks for sale! Only $79.95 plus shipping and handling. Financing available in three easy payments of $28.17!
(some restrictions may apply, offer not valid in Florida, Texas or Puerto Rico. Pitchfork LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of Ragebait Incorporated, licenced and incorporated in Delaware. Side affects of pitchforks include insomnia, narcolepsy, vomiting, diarrhea, and CEO death and inprisonment. Pitchfork LLC and Ragebait Incorporated not responsible for shit. Payment plan interest rate 32.7% compounded daily.)
Is it bad that I read that last section in the super fast barely intelligible voice they use in medication ads?
‘Nobody panics when things go “according to plan.”’ – as a software engineer, I assure you this isn’t completely true. If things are too smooth, something is definitely, probably horribly and sneakily, wrong.
“Any problem that goes away by itself can come back by itself.” - fellow programmer I knew
False positives make me lose sleep because I get oaged. False negatives make me lose sleep because of the dread.
(When I carried a pager) I’d rather occasionally get paged at 3AM for nothing than not get a page when it actually was Something. But those were production systems for things that would make the news if they went down.
