Well hot damn if Reddit says it it must be true. Have you heard of a concept called context?
United Healthcare CEO shot and killed in Manhattan
- Thread starter K Douglas
- Start date
He is responsible for his company policies.
He was being paid 10M + stock options for it.
So am not going to feel sorry for how tough his job is.
What matters is the 32% denial rate that caused millions of families to lose their loved ones.
How many families lost their dads because of UHC denials?
What about their use of AI that was wrong 90% of the time?
What about insurances cancelling policies right after they file a claim for cancers using extremely flimsy reasons?
By all accounts he was an evil bastard who got what was coming to him.
Justice is often times cruel.
The "business" model is gambling and scamming. It's take people's money then do their level best NOT TO PAY OUT. It's that simple.
So no, it isn't commie. It's basic consumer protection.
And it's not about not giving a product, it's about denial of healthcare to people. It's about letting them suffer and die.
Go ahead, explain the virtues of this business model. I'm waiting.
It is when it's as near universal as it has been. Left, right, centre. All, in literally in the millions, from comment sections, reddit threats, tic tocs, YouTube videos, articles, blogs, podcasts. All about how bad the companies are.
The only ones defending them, are the MSM companies, who the companies advertise on. Are you suddenly trusting CNN and MSNBC now?
We was directly responsible. He was the CEO. He made the policy calls. That's the job? If the CEO isn't the leader and policy maker, then who the fuck is, and why is it a tough job?
Seriously, explain the business model. Who is responsible for the policies that end with 32% denial rates and using the AI illegally?
The current UHC CEO literally told his employees "we will guard against unnecessary care".
According to UHC going to the hospital is unnecessary.
They expect you to walk your cancer off. lmao.
So I heard on the radio today as I was driving home that United Healthcare was (or is) under investigation by Department of Justice for fraudulent and negligent practices. Not sure whats going on with that, or if they still are under investigation
Found it
www.foxbusiness.com
DOJ launched probe into UnitedHealth for insider trading and attempted to stop monopoly
Multiple executives at UnitedHealthcare were under investigation by the Department of Justice for insider trading and fraud when CEO Brian Thompson was shot and killed Wednesday.
www.foxbusiness.com
At the risk of sounding unempathetic, which I am accused of frequently, you can’t just read horror story threads and make emotionally based judgements upon that. People be dying from illnesses. Under any healthcare system.
You guys seem to forget that insurance companies are by definition and by design supposed to minimize pay outs. It’s not part of their function to be altruistic. Don’t get me wrong, I think the concept of insurance and health care being married is completely fucked for this reason. But I wouldn’t go as far as to blame the companies and call them cold killers. They’re doing what they are supposed to do.
A lot of you were swayed by that chart that had Kaiser at a 7% denial rate and UHC at 32%. It was a very misleading chart. Yes, UHC is awful, but they’re not really that much more awful than all the rest of the companies listed.
People also ignored the fact that 80% of claims that are denied then appealed actually are granted and paid out. There’s laws that ensure this.
Kaiser has a low denial rate because it’s a fully integrated company and HMO — the doctors already know not to refer or recommend any treatment/diagnostics/specialists that will not be approved by Kaiser. So of course the denial rate is freakishly low — they never get to the point of even making a request. It’s controlled at every stage by Kaiser. Kaiser is fine for everyday medical issues and check ups. But for the big scary events they’re going to fuck you over too.
UHC has a completely different business model. UHC isn’t integrated like Kaiser. As far as I can tell the most evil thing UHC did was target seniors and fuck them over. They actually pandered to them really hard. Poor old folks, I know.
Again at the risk of sounding cold, it’s possible the UHC insurance powers that be thought seniors would be the logical place to deny payouts, because they were old and about to die anyway. Idk. But it seems highly possible.
Public healthcare “denies” us here in Canada for many many things too. It’s just it is more invisible. It is not “free” and waiting until someone says you can get the medical treatment you need is exactly the same as getting denied by an insurance company. We are just less indignant about it because we believe it’s free in some way. My dad got booted out of the hospital while dying of cancer — I could write that in tragic Reddit horror story format too, and it would look functionally identical.
A big problem with calling any of this “killing”, is the degrees of separation between the acts of the accused “killer” and the deaths. You’re placing CEO at the beginning of some causal chain leading to the deaths. But that’s faulty reasoning — obviously we could go further and regress infinitely into who he was answering to, what caused insurance to exist and so on, forever… so this isn’t a great way to attribute moral responsibility.
By that logic you could be like Peter Singer and call me (and probably everyone here) morally responsible for not trying to save third world children from starvation. Just by placing us on the causal chain by knowing we could help and choosing not to. We killed them through conscious inaction. This is not a tenable path of moral reasoning to follow.
All that’s left is to consider intent. Did he intend to kill these people? No. Denials simply happen when something isn’t shown to be medically necessary. And in truth? 80% of denials that are appealed are granted pay outs. Repeated for emphasis.
Not choosing to rescue someone isn’t killing them. There are many reasons someone in his position or whoever was working for him might not choose to rescue a person. None of them involve murder or a desire to end a person’s life.
I’m not saying it’s okay! But it’s not killing. I think insurance+healthcare is a recipe for disaster. I prefer universal healthcare.
BUT
The average Ontarian pays something like $8500 a year for public healthcare I think? Not so different from the average American. I prefer public but it’s really only marginally better. I still can’t find/see a good family doctor after moving downtown and it’s been 8 years. I have one who is only available a couple hours a week sporadically. I pay out of pocket for private services these days.
Last edited:
Sorry for the long post, I was accused of being a pseudointellectual the other day so I was reluctant to say everything I wanted to say. But there it is
He ran a $474B company that made profits on the suffering of their patients/clients. When he was killed, half the country cheered, something is seriously fucking wrong with that business model.
Yes, he did intend to kill people. You don't pay out if they die, do you?
Stating that an insurance company is just following the business model is correct. The business model in this case is to not give people medical care. If a person chooses to head that company, and spend their time as CEO trying to figure out ways, or paying others, to figure out ways, to do this, then they are imo, sociopathic assholes. No one is forcing them to be the CEO. It's voluntary and pays well. They pay them to take on the responsibility of the policies.
Btw the AI resulted in a 90% second opinion denial. And was illegal. So what are the consequences for this? A fine? Paid for by the company?
Yes, delaying and denying care kills people. To state otherwise is ludicrous. And indifference is not a defense. Leave a person dying the side of the road after an accident, not call 911, even if you didn't have any part in the accident, and you are a piece of shit.
He chose to be part of a system that places money above lives. It's that simple.
Don't apologize ever for speaking your mind.
Yes I did not deny health insurance is evil business, I just don’t think we can call them murderers. Any of them. No reason to single him out as special. Should Americans march upon them and kill them all? Then what? People voted for that. Some Americans have fought me tooth and nail saying that their healthcare system is superior. They don’t want to pay taxes. So who do you place the blame on for the deaths then? Are they killers too?
I am just saying there are necessary conditions to call someone a killer/murderer. They are not met in this case.
In the States at least, it seems they are a somewhat necessary evil. Pay your money and take your chances. I went through the prostate cancer system four years ago, received excellent treatment and was out of pocket...zero. I spoke with a guy in the U.S. recently and his Mom was left without health coverage halfway through her cancer treatment. It`s now a big legal battle, her medical care and lawyer fees are over 45 Grand so far. As always....Fuck cancer.
Yeah I hear stories like this
I was trying to address every point, not make a snarky concise retort lol
it’s important
I dont think we'd have to take the killer/murderer accusation literally.
People are just using hyperbole to convey the seriousness of the issue.
It is true that a business's only function and reason for existence is profits for shareholders.
From that standpoint it can be argued that UHC (and others) did no wrong.
But every business that exists, even if not legally defined, HAS to positively benefit the community in which it exists.
Lives need to be better because of their existence.
This is an unwritten moral imperative.
Otherwise they become nothing more than entities that leach off of people, to benefit a few.
This will ultimately result in backlash.
And in more serious cases - revolution.
So I think Brian Thompson and other CEOs of these companies being blamed in this case, is correct even though they physically did not commit the act of murder.
They just oversaw businesses, approved processes and fostered a culture that operated without a collective conscience.
They operated putting their profits first, and the people they were serving last.
That said let us also not forget that the healthcare provider is just as much to blame.
In the US if you have health insurance your costs are actually higher, than if you do not.
Healthcare is systemically fucked up philosophically and in practice in the US at every level - at the healthcare provider, insurance, prescriptions - the patient is the last person to benefit.
People are just using hyperbole to convey the seriousness of the issue.
It is true that a business's only function and reason for existence is profits for shareholders.
From that standpoint it can be argued that UHC (and others) did no wrong.
But every business that exists, even if not legally defined, HAS to positively benefit the community in which it exists.
Lives need to be better because of their existence.
This is an unwritten moral imperative.
Otherwise they become nothing more than entities that leach off of people, to benefit a few.
This will ultimately result in backlash.
And in more serious cases - revolution.
So I think Brian Thompson and other CEOs of these companies being blamed in this case, is correct even though they physically did not commit the act of murder.
They just oversaw businesses, approved processes and fostered a culture that operated without a collective conscience.
They operated putting their profits first, and the people they were serving last.
That said let us also not forget that the healthcare provider is just as much to blame.
In the US if you have health insurance your costs are actually higher, than if you do not.
Healthcare is systemically fucked up philosophically and in practice in the US at every level - at the healthcare provider, insurance, prescriptions - the patient is the last person to benefit.
