And now, there is no more father tucking his kids in bed while his company keeps denying just as many claims as before, so how exactly can his murder be defended in either moral or political terms? What exactly has been accomplished by his murder? No matter how much greedy healthcare execs suck, wanton assassinations are not the way to deal with this issue.

Basically, the argument to make is that decisions by healthcare insurers are decisions about life and death and should therefore not be subject to unfettered profit maximization. Or that free market logic doesn't apply in the case of healthcare since one's health is vital and non-negotiable, so "don't buy if you don't like or can't afford the price" is simply not an option.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Dec 15 2025 07:10pm

A 5th suspect from the pipe bombing / anti ICE terrorist plot was arrested today, and is a transgender antifa member
The photos from the desert show they had functional bombs and were arrested in the testing phases, with a whole table set up for bomb manufacturing

wondr how long the "talk a bunch of chit" war going to last?
gotta hand it to the demoncrotches they set their own people up for this chit

im not justifying his murder, but you replied to "he was basically a mass murderer" with "any definitive proof". yes, there is, he's the head of an organization that is culpable for the deaths of tens or hundreds of thousands of people, and in an industry known for that his company stood out as especially bad. and not just his company, but his tenure. he ushered in an era of increased denial of claims with pure profit motivation.

as to how to fix the issue, well.... murder wont do it, we agree, but im not seeing many other options either. the only real option is pure socialist healthcare, because the legislature will never draft an anti insurance checks and balances bill.

The fuck? The dude allowed thousands of fathers to die when he could have allowed needed health care to let them fight to keep living. At least you're showing exactly where you're at which is good.

"Duueh my gawd guys his family doesnt have a father!" Post this on reddit I beg you.

https://www.ynetnews.com/jewish-world/article/hj9ee5rgbl

At least jews are safe in new york ci-
Add it to the list

Health insurance at its root is a bureaucracy formed to administer a social service to save lives. Hating on it is like hating on someone collecting for the Salvation Army or World Central Kitchen. Is there a specific, direct line of embezzlement or corruption to personally enrich someone at the expense of innocent lives? Or is it a nebulous claim of policy choices where there are legitimate competing interests and scarcity of resources that requires insurers to make difficult tradeoffs? Because if all it takes is some nebulous accusations of profiteering to motivate a significant chunk of the electorate to violence and support wanton assassinations of middlemen bureaucrats administering our social services- then maybe we don't deserve to have social services at all. Health insurance as a concept hasn't even existed for 100 years, medicare wasn't introduced until '65. And now the people who want the pure socialist healthcare are also willing to kill people for nothing more than weak narratives of 'denied claims'

The fact is that UnitedHealth had a profit margin of 0% last quarter and averaged 4-6% per year, same as other for-profit insurers. Its extremely doubtful that a federal agency could manage a single payer system with less overhead because every government run service is a fucking disaster. Whatever money is being milked out of the premiums and the taxpayers subsidizing them, is not being stolen by insurers en masse. Even the greediest pharmaceutical companies are barely a dent in the bottom line of healthcare. Instead, by far the vast majority of healthcare spending goes to doctors, nurses, pharmacists and other service and administrative level workers. And their salaries are often comically, disproportionately high. That's where the money goes. How many people die each year being 'unable to afford healthcare' because each surgeon is making $500-700k+.

Take it a step back from the wider angle. All political violence that is premised upon a diffusion of harm being laid at the feet of any singular target is nothing but immoral terrorism, impotent to affect change and utterly unjustified. It has to be rejected by anyone with a shred of civility or else there's no point to having organized society and governance, we'll just default back to anarchy and might makes right and the militant rape gangs of Turkana IV. No single person created the current healthcare system, just as no person nor movement has any single idea on how to fix it. Its a product of the limitations of our bureaucracy and the demands vastly outstripping supply, also why the true product being sold- the services of doctors and nurses- are priced so outrageously. Obamacare showed the flaws at the core, we got rid of the callous mass denial of care of HMOs and gave free coverage to everyone who couldn't afford healthcare. The costs rose astronomically, the supply couldn't possibly keep up, we now have shortages and premium hikes and inflation. Do the lawmakers who voted to expand benefits without the means to pay for it, deserve to die? Do the people who triage what care we can give, deserve to die? Do republicans who oppose indefinitely extending temporary subsidization we only put in place for Covid, deserve to die? Do democrats who made healthcare unaffordable for middle class americans, deserve to die?

We can't solve the intractable problems in america if all we get from one side is seething hatred and murderous intent.

honestly, go off king! the issues are vast, and fixing it is likely impossible without a lot of unintended harm. it's either unguaranteed care at a lower cost, or "guaranteed" care that never actually comes before you die or worsen. the system can of course be improved a lot by fiddling with the knobs, but who can we trust to turn them correctly? maybe a cap on some care procedures is a good idea, but will they act with restraint or push good doctors out because they cap way too much?

honestly its all pretty moot with such an unhealthy population, america cant really socialize healthcare while its addicted to the foods that make its costs untenable. at the end of the day im not celebrating a healthcare CEOs death, and im not crying about it either. im apathetic to it all.

Between the subsidization of costs kicking it down the road and being a proximate spark of inflation which is now biting us in the ass, and the unhealthy population, and import of people who consume more benefits than pay taxes, its clearly an intractable problem
But I'm not at all apathetic to political violence from it, because that is an omen that the issue won't be solved at all and will instead erupt in a way that makes it much worse.

5 years ago every democrat stood up on stage and said their healthcare plan would give free taxpayer funded benefits to illegal aliens at the federal level. We've already had multiple healthcare-motivated terror attacks. Premiums are jumping again and they're mad we aren't shoveling more covidbucks at it. All of this is a recipe for things getting worse, difficult problems require hard solutions that will be unpalatable to many people. I've said for decades we should nationalize the whole industry and that means necessarily hard axing the pay for doctors and nurses who become federal employees. I think on the GS scale a specialty surgeon would be like a GS-37 when it only goes up to GS-13 civilian. Well how are we going to get Americans to accept hard cuts to services, higher taxes, more strict immigration/citizenship/benefits and tank an entire career path all at the same time if they'll say you're committing an act of genocide when you don't pay for the sex reassignment surgery of a 10 year old kid who can't consent to it

id be ok with nationalizing it, not because i expect it to fix it, but because i know that's where we're headed eventually. might as well start smoothing out the lumps now. i think it would also get the ball rolling on a lot of things because they'd prove to be hurdles. immigration reform might come a lot quicker if we nationalize, then again its not in the UK, France or Germany.