The public reaction is what scares them. They are entirely disconnected from the consequences their actions impose on the public and can’t imagine why their “customers” would be cheering the death of their peer. They don’t think Brian Thompson did anything wrong, maximizing shareholder value is a noble goal after all, so from their perspective the public just seems bloodthirsty.
Much like how DC politicians live in a bubble where they think everyone in the US has grocery options and plentiful healthcare (due to how business around DC structures these things so those “leaders” just assume all of the US is like DC), the C suite lives in a tone-deaf rich-person bubble with zero comprehension about what it is like to actually live in the shitty world they orchestrate and manipulate.
Reading some guff about the Kroger-Albertsons attempted merger was case in point. These corpos said: “Oh, if we don’t merge, we can’t compete against Walmart and Amazon, and we’ll have to close stores.” Like, no? What business goes, “hey, so we can’t compete with adjacent-market companies, time to close up the places that generate our revenue!”
Or the recent Congressional vote to spend THREE BILLION OF OUR DOLLARS paying telecom companies to remove Chinese hardware from their networks. Something they were told to do years ago. The same carriers that will continue to raise our service rates every few months are making us (via Congress) pay them OUR money to do what they should have done themselves years ago.
None of these morons get it, they just keep corrupting their way to profits off of our backs, while digging out the ground we stand on from underneath us.
That’s the thing, healthcare parasites are just the tip of the iceberg here…
Got to resolve health first but so much work done done.
All oligopolies operate like health parasites, they ruin quality of life while looting us like a piggy bank.
Are we not?
I am.
Reminds me of finding out the taco bell executive used the phrase ‘thinking outside the bun’ in the I actual work correspondences.
To function in a big huge corporate c-suite level you must drink the cool-aid.
They are rich, and they are powerful. On top of that, they are delusional. It’s a fantastic combination.
Everyone says this but I disagree. I’m sure Musk and many other public figures are emperors without clothes or whatever. But this idea that most execs are this other species blind to the muck under their boot… but most people are normal people… They may be mean, evil, mentally ill. But they don’t party in the front train car with no idea about the insect bars in the back. They’re just selfish and don’t care. They’re well aware. Don’t give them credit for ignorance by delusion. It’s malice. I make business decisions. I make them in partnership with colleagues. Some are kind. Some are dicks. But they’re intelligent enough to know what decision they’re making. And this transcends boxes. Even some of the most compassionate and empathetic human centric people I’ve ever worked with, proven in actions, not words, are repeat Trump voters. Having said that, most verticals of business are like elected office in that a certain type of person is going to win and get to the top. Oil tycoons know they’re burning the earth for personal gain. Non profit exec takes a big slice of pie, understanding the bookkeeping. They both just believe they should have it. Maybe not even deserve. Many leaders feel ordained to retroactively validate vile means to ends. “I’m on top, so I’m supposed to be on top. I see I stepped on people but that’s okay, because I’m supposed to be on top.” I know wealthy people too and it’s nearly the same. They’re on earth. They see what’s up. Many of them are in your office but just don’t mention cotillion or junior league. Some are kind, some are assholes. Just like all people.
Signs around NYC.
this is good more of this please
Also add Elon, please.
he’d probably just be like : “See? I AM wanted! Take this mom and dad!”
Wow, I really feel like I should be clutching my pearls over the fact that this is what it’s come to.
On the other hand…
Just like cops, these folks have earned every bit of hatred coming to them from the public. Even now they continue to pad their own bank account at a staggering rate on the deaths and misery of their fellow man.
If I were a healthcare executive with a conscience (lol I know), or even a healthcare executive with an adequate fear response, I’d resign tomorrow. (Or maybe yesterday?) I guarantee any of these folks has enough wealth to exceed the typical US lifestyle for the rest of their natural lives without having to take any more money for denying care to their fellow citizens. They can pack their shit, never work another day, and still spend the rest of their lives with less stress and greater financial security than my family ever will. There’s literally nothing stopping them.
And if their “Type A” personality just can’t let them spend multiple decades of their lives just relaxing with their family and enriching their inner self, they have a great resume to get a job at an industry that doesn’t profit from the death and pain of their fellow citizens.
so they’re going to spend a whole bunch of the companies money on security firms, it’s definitely going to come out of the executive compensation and not the workers, right? …right?
deleted by creator
I’m sure most shareholders would agree with you.
The trouble is that most shareholders own their shares through mutual funds in their retirement accounts, and those shares get voted by the fund managers at Vanguard/Black Rock/Fidelity/etc. Those people definitely are part of the good ol’ boys club and will definitely vote in the executives’ interest and against their clients’.
Ha! They’ll take it from the workers AND raise the prices of whatever products they’re selling then pass the cost onto us for a tidy bit of extra profit. The leeches have to suck as much blood out of us as possible.
Owners have to make these officers feel secure again… so we will pay for the security… they can’t have their comp cut just because some hero murdered their peer.
Good
I’m pretty sure that was part of the point.
Legally, the murder was wrong. Full stop. There’s no legal argument here that it wasn’t. It may not have been the guy they caught, but someone was murdered and legally that’s wrong.
Morally though, it’s a lot more gray. It’s pretty easy to prove that health insurers policies have literally been killing people thousands of people a year at at a minimum and even if it’s legal for some reason, that’s also still morally wrong. Attacking someone who’s attacking other people is usually called defending.
The CEO was on his way to implement policies that would kill thousands of people, and injure tens of thousands.
I see no moral gray area.
Because you refuse to
Edit: most things are a gray area. Doesn’t speak well of you if you think killing a human is so black and white it shouldn’t even be questioned. You motherfuckers sure ain’t philosophers.
Pretty obvious I meant that if you can’t see an argument for and against killing this guy you’re probably not much of a thinker, at least by choice on this issue
Yeah just as rich leeches refuse to stop exploiting innoncent people and you refuse to stop bootlicking
deleted by creator
Ah yes you dipshits knew what I meant as you are incredible mind readers
He was a CEO, not a king. He doesn’t single-handedly come up with and implement these decisions.
- The policies are probably brainstormed in meetings with several people.
- The policies are probably voted on by an even greater number of people
- The policies are implemented by another set of people
- The policies are enforced by another set of people
- The profit of the company, which these policies likely aim to improve, is almost the single main goal of all of the shareholders.
- Many other people have likely invested indirectly (e.g., in funds that contain that company’s stock) and were also benefitting from the implementation of these policies.
The CEO may have been a big part of the problem, but he’s not the only part. He may have even been a symptom of the problem. Was he elected, appointed? Who brought him into that position? Who didn’t make the decision to remove him from that position if the opportunity arose?
EDIT: I’m not really sure why people are downvoting this. I’m not saying the CEO was innocent, I’m saying he’s not the only one who holds the guilt for the decision.
So what you’re saying is, the job’s not done yet?
There’s a question of where the line would be drawn.
But do you kill everyone responsible for a joint decision?
Do you kill everyone who benefitted from it? Shareholders, indirect investors, spouses and children…?
How many of your loved ones have they already murdered?
How many more will have to die before the owners of this country decide that a for-profit healthcare system isn’t worth the threat those profits generate?
The death toll of the health insurance industry currently stands at like 68,000/year. Health, life, and medical insurance companies combined employ about 900,000 people. We could end the insurance industry overnight and the lives saved would outnumber the jobs lost in like 13 years.
You’re right we have a lot more work to do.
When it comes to money they’re accountable and deserve millions.
When it comes to the impact of their leadership they couldn’t possibly be accountable.
You’re hopelessly wrong and un-abashedly trying to defend ghouls.
If the CEO makes the big bucks then they share the most of the blame. You can’t have one without the other.
Also don’t deliberately ignore the fact that for a brief moment in time after the CEO’s death, there was a drastic reduction in the number of claims being denied.
un-abashedly trying to defend ghouls.
No, I’m not.
If the CEO makes the big bucks then they share the most of the blame. You can’t have one without the other.
This will definitely depend on the particulars of an organization, but usually it’s not just one singular CEO who’s getting rich by making these decisions.
Also don’t deliberately ignore the fact that for a brief moment in time after the CEO’s death, there was a drastic reduction in the number of claims being denied.
I wasn’t aware of this, and I’m not sure why you would describe that as “deliberately ignoring” it…lol
Legally, the murder was wrong. Full stop.
True but this was self defense. I don’t see murder. Murder is the terminology of the regime who is trying to pin some crime on him that I don’t see.
It doesn’t sound like it was self defence, even if you stretch the meaning away from the legal. His life wasn’t directly threatened by this organization.
He did it on behalf of others, which eliminates the self in self defence.
Yeah and cops are always in fear when they murder a civilian…
Tomato, potato
True but this was self defense.
Is this a misuse of legal terms, or is there some sort of evidence behind this?
I was being cheeky mostly but i do think if we as society re asses what self defense means, whoever killed the parasite was defending america from social murder.
The ruling class would never accept such narrative but every American can decide for himself.
When cop murders a civilian for no reason, aint it always also defense? So clearly they misuse the term here. I think newer argument has more legs to stand on.
The term is “justifiable homicide”.
If the Joker is about to blow up a bus of 30 people and Batman shoots him dead with a gun then the jury acquits because it was justifiable homicide
I think the difference with cops is that they don’t need the self-defense argument, because the “oopsie” argument gets them out of jail too
well they always say “feared for their life” so i think you have a point but that argument is root in idea that they always have a right to defend themselves and be given deference on their decision making, ie they only need to feel that way subjectively.
When peaceful and effective protest are a choose1, gotta go with effective. If anything, it seems to me to be little different to the trolley problem.
I’ve been thinking of it like what happened to Nicolai Caucescu. Sure, his death shouldn’t have happened and he should have had a trial for his crimes, corruption, and abuses of power; but, Romania came out better afterwards.
One of the few times where freedom is washed in the tyrants blood instead of the working class. Truly a victory.
Legally, the murder was wrong. Full stop.
¡Hey Buddy! That’s for a jury to decide
Not really. The jury will decide if this particular person is guilty or not, but either way a man was murderer and that’s an illegal action by whomever did it.
Attacking someone who’s attacking other people is usually called defending.
Same thing said by cops every time they shoot someone.
that’s why propaganda is a key cog in ruling the working class. they play with words in such a way that there is always an argument
“forcing leaders to ask themselves uncomfortable questions about their own preparedness for a threat landscape that appears far more serious than many realized just a week ago.”
It’s probably even more serious than they think it is right now too.
In fact, all I see are talks of securing these executives. And as the article points out, security is a sunk cost. There is no financial gain. That means as security gets more expensive, they will have to weigh how to afford it versus the problems they cause.
Fear isn’t the word I think we want though, fear seems too normal. Terror sounds closer to what they likely need to feel before things get better.
This is exactly my thought. C-levels are going to want competent security and not Rent A Cops, which costs. Companies which provide those services already charge a decent chunk of change for it, and the rates will likely go through the roof now. Additionally, I think they’ll find that these “security consultants” will suggest absolutely unacceptable lifestyle changes for them to minimize areas of concern. Much easier to secure a house than a whole nightclub, or golf course.
Also, I am assuming a lot of grade A security are SOF types who fought in two stupid wars on behalf of owner class.
Makes you wonder how a person like that would feel about a dead parasite him or her self
Hmmm
Would they really care to take a bullet for a parasite?
There is really no way to tell, sadly.
How many of their own brothers and sisters in the forces have had medical claims denied? How many of them live in pain because their pain medication was deemed a “lifestyle choice” instead of a necessity? This kind of injustice permeates everything, every walk of life that can’t afford healthcare by themselves.
Military medical insurance, at least for active duty, is pretty decent. But the military medical system is really it’s own beast with its own problems. You don’t have to worry about coverage so much as fighting for the care you need.
If you listen to the news segment, it talks about security completely and not about chnaging the corporate zeitgeist around the priority balance between workers, customers, and shareholders.
Hear that whooshing sound?
Right? No introspection at all. I doubt the C-suite of Patagonia sees a need to increase security.
The revolution will not be televised
It’s sort of funny. All they are going to do is isolate the bastards into doing even more corrupt shit.
They really refuse to believe that the first part of finding out, is fucking around.
The more they fuck around and put profit ahead of everything, the more finding out I imagine is going to occur.
“There are reports that girls are fawning over this guy. This level of notoriety risks triggering copycats. And let’s face it, some business leaders are
vulnerablecomplete fucking ass bags”Fixed that for em
If somebody’s got the itch and just has to go shoot up something this is a way, way better thing to copycat than school shooters.
Amazing how we all can agree on this one simple thing…
Clean denial of claim to life to executives is socially acceptable
There’s a lot of angry lonely men out there.
If there’s anything that will motivate someone to kill it’s the potential that women might give them attention.
Good, good.
Probably more fear from seeing how the public at large has reacted.
People creating barbaric conditions are afraid of barbarians?
🤏🎻😭
I. Love. It.
Hahahah this is amazing.
Quality work
100% - to be clear, it’s not my own work, I stole it from the internet. ^_^
Healthcare is the target now but who’s next?
Nope, insurance is finance. They don’t actually provide health care services.
Calling insurance healthcare is journalistic malpractice. Get better at your craft or get shit on.
I mean, when you’ve been actively supressing wages for decades so that you can keep your employees in debt to make them more subservient, you also kind of create a powderkeg of resentment and ill will. They really thought there would never be a spark?
