|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On December 07 2024 00:39 brian wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 00:01 oBlade wrote:
If we could raise corpses from the grave, healthcare would be moot.
Every revolutionary psychopath celebrating this, intimating this is progress, or implying this should happen more or be threatened to - is completely lost - every single "argument" in favor of assassinating this person can be copy and pasted to support the assassination of Obama or Biden or hundreds of others.
Civilized people have realized you do not make progress in an environment where people assassinate each other, you simply select for people good at assassinating, which doesn't tend to lead society in a good direction, which is why we instead rationally select against assassination.
Speaking of Obama, the people who scoffed at the idea Obamacare would result in "death panels" would be the ones cheering this guy being excuted for being part of an insurance company... under Obamacare. But any case of a judicial killing or self-defense or punishing a criminal is despotic fascist overreach, we need to be lenient and sympathetic when it comes to crime, except when guillotining the bourgeoisie. Sure.
There was not one single post here about this guy or the alleged issues of United Healthcare before he got shot. This is how much people cared about the Stalinesque figure of healthcare genocide. Because they realized one day that the world isn't perfect, sick people die, and not everyone gets treatment that they need or don't need. Nobody knew who the fuck he was but the Daily Show communists are immediately able to know enough about everything to conclude hanging a CEO, of course, that must always be a good thing.
There are thousands of people dying waiting in the UK and Canada. There are thousands more in Canada that simply get killed instead of waiting. Want to switch to universal healthcare so you can switch to assassinating public figures in government responsible for that instead of people near the top of large companies? Because if you put the government in charge and change the name to "universal" that automatically means there's unlimited free resources for everyone who wants them - right? - whoops, no, it's still the same doctors and same hospitals servicing the same population. Completely absurd and anyone espousing any support for this murder should be permanently disenfranchised and sent somewhere where psychologists can study what went wrong to cause them to get such assbackwards perspectives. yea, why should we set the bar at only having the same healthcare failures as other developed countries when we can also inject the additional hurdle of extracting billions in profits at the expense of our citizens health into the mix. That’s America baby! unrelated, anyone got any boots that need cleaning?
My boots are pretty dirty from walking all day through the Free Shit Orchard and realizing that no matter how many trees I went to, none of them had motivated doctors growing on them or world class innovation and investment or top hospitals that I could just pluck and take home in my naive wicker basket.
|
On December 07 2024 00:44 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 00:39 brian wrote:On December 07 2024 00:01 oBlade wrote:
If we could raise corpses from the grave, healthcare would be moot.
Every revolutionary psychopath celebrating this, intimating this is progress, or implying this should happen more or be threatened to - is completely lost - every single "argument" in favor of assassinating this person can be copy and pasted to support the assassination of Obama or Biden or hundreds of others.
Civilized people have realized you do not make progress in an environment where people assassinate each other, you simply select for people good at assassinating, which doesn't tend to lead society in a good direction, which is why we instead rationally select against assassination.
Speaking of Obama, the people who scoffed at the idea Obamacare would result in "death panels" would be the ones cheering this guy being excuted for being part of an insurance company... under Obamacare. But any case of a judicial killing or self-defense or punishing a criminal is despotic fascist overreach, we need to be lenient and sympathetic when it comes to crime, except when guillotining the bourgeoisie. Sure.
There was not one single post here about this guy or the alleged issues of United Healthcare before he got shot. This is how much people cared about the Stalinesque figure of healthcare genocide. Because they realized one day that the world isn't perfect, sick people die, and not everyone gets treatment that they need or don't need. Nobody knew who the fuck he was but the Daily Show communists are immediately able to know enough about everything to conclude hanging a CEO, of course, that must always be a good thing.
There are thousands of people dying waiting in the UK and Canada. There are thousands more in Canada that simply get killed instead of waiting. Want to switch to universal healthcare so you can switch to assassinating public figures in government responsible for that instead of people near the top of large companies? Because if you put the government in charge and change the name to "universal" that automatically means there's unlimited free resources for everyone who wants them - right? - whoops, no, it's still the same doctors and same hospitals servicing the same population. Completely absurd and anyone espousing any support for this murder should be permanently disenfranchised and sent somewhere where psychologists can study what went wrong to cause them to get such assbackwards perspectives. yea, why should we set the bar at only having the same healthcare failures as other developed countries when we can also inject the additional hurdle of extracting billions in profits at the expense of our citizens health into the mix. That’s America baby! unrelated, anyone got any boots that need cleaning? My boots are pretty dirty from walking all day through the Free Shit Orchard and realizing that no matter how many trees I went to, none of them had motivated doctors growing on them or world class innovation and investment or top hospitals that I could just pluck and take home in my naive wicker basket.
patently ridiculous to suggest socialized health care doctors aren’t
motivated or ‘world class.’ american exceptionalism argument.
believe it or not there’s an entire organization of doctors that volunteer to work for free, they are so motivated by the notion of actually helping people. and not money. 😳
|
Northern Ireland23373 Posts
On December 07 2024 00:01 oBlade wrote:
If we could raise corpses from the grave, healthcare would be moot.
Every revolutionary psychopath celebrating this, intimating this is progress, or implying this should happen more or be threatened to - is completely lost - every single "argument" in favor of assassinating this person can be copy and pasted to support the assassination of Obama or Biden or hundreds of others.
Civilized people have realized you do not make progress in an environment where people assassinate each other, you simply select for people good at assassinating, which doesn't tend to lead society in a good direction, which is why we instead rationally select against assassination.
Speaking of Obama, the people who scoffed at the idea Obamacare would result in "death panels" would be the ones cheering this guy being excuted for being part of an insurance company... under Obamacare. But any case of a judicial killing or self-defense or punishing a criminal is despotic fascist overreach, we need to be lenient and sympathetic when it comes to crime, except when guillotining the bourgeoisie. Sure.
There was not one single post here about this guy or the alleged issues of United Healthcare before he got shot. This is how much people cared about the Stalinesque figure of healthcare genocide. Because they realized one day that the world isn't perfect, sick people die, and not everyone gets treatment that they need or don't need. Nobody knew who the fuck he was but the Daily Show communists are immediately able to know enough about everything to conclude hanging a CEO, of course, that must always be a good thing.
There are thousands of people dying waiting in the UK and Canada. There are thousands more in Canada that simply get killed instead of waiting. Want to switch to universal healthcare so you can switch to assassinating public figures in government responsible for that instead of people near the top of large companies? Because if you put the government in charge and change the name to "universal" that automatically means there's unlimited free resources for everyone who wants them - right? - whoops, no, it's still the same doctors and same hospitals servicing the same population. Completely absurd and anyone espousing any support for this murder should be permanently disenfranchised and sent somewhere where psychologists can study what went wrong to cause them to get such assbackwards perspectives.
There were also approximately a million posts of US healthcare structures in general.
To apply the same logic you used on Magic re bandwidth throttling, if you seek to serve all the populace, you’ll have to triage your available resources.
The key difference is there’s nobody in the NHS becoming fabulously wealthy in denying care to folks on a profit model.
Public healthcare does has delivery challenges precisely because it’s trying to cover everyone regardless of wallet or circumstance. People are plenty critical of the NHS over here. But those criticisms come from practical dysfunction, they aren’t couched in the fundamental morality of said system.
Why does the US have shorter waitlists? Why because the poors with worse insurance aren’t in them! It’s pretty simple
For someone recommending folks be sent for psychological study you sure as fuck don’t seem to have a grasp of some very basic differences and why people respond very differently to those differences.
|
Northern Ireland23373 Posts
On December 06 2024 21:26 Uldridge wrote:
These are the differences between people looking at others as a statistic and representation of an idea, instead of as an individual.
Both are true, while only one realizes itself as a tragedy. Those who were close to him feel the latter. Those who don't, the former. I am becoming more and more sure this is one of our biggest societal problems. In groups becoming so large it’s alienating itself.
This has been a thing for thousands of years. It’s nothing new. I think we do have new challenges today but the abstraction of the individual is not one of them.
|
On December 07 2024 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2024 23:57 Simberto wrote:On December 06 2024 23:41 Jockmcplop wrote:
Its like I said, as CEO of that company he had no choice but to do what he did.
Try explaining to shareholders that they could be making more money, but you'd have to harm alot of people so you won't do it.
See how that goes down.
Its not like the next CEO is all of a sudden going to put human well being above profit.
Its cliche now, but what Carlin said was correct. This system only cares about humans until they're born. That is insane. You can just not take the job. Or behave like a human being and get fired. Or whatever. No one forces you to harm people for profit. It is possible to make ethical decisions, especially regarding your own actions. Some people just choose not to for personal gain. As a German, i cannot accept that kind of "I had no choice, i was just following orders/the rules" as an excuse for horrific behaviour. Else working at Auschwitz would also have been completely fine. After all, they were just following the law and the orders given to them. I said the words 'as CEO' Everyone immediately jumps down my throat and says he could not take the job, quit or refuse to do his job, all of which make him not a CEO. Engage brains, then reply, people. I agree with the insanity of the situation. The whole of US healthcare is insane. Shooting a CEO doesn't fix it, because the next guy will do the same thing.
How come the CEOs of the competitors didn't go to such lengths? Did they lose their jobs?
|
United States41675 Posts
On December 07 2024 00:03 oBlade wrote:
Working at a health insurance company isn't the fucking Holocaust, whether you are German or Austrian or anything else.
Coming up with more efficient ways to take medicine from sick people is a movie villain job description.
|
Northern Ireland23373 Posts
On December 07 2024 01:03 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On December 06 2024 23:57 Simberto wrote:On December 06 2024 23:41 Jockmcplop wrote:
Its like I said, as CEO of that company he had no choice but to do what he did.
Try explaining to shareholders that they could be making more money, but you'd have to harm alot of people so you won't do it.
See how that goes down.
Its not like the next CEO is all of a sudden going to put human well being above profit.
Its cliche now, but what Carlin said was correct. This system only cares about humans until they're born. That is insane. You can just not take the job. Or behave like a human being and get fired. Or whatever. No one forces you to harm people for profit. It is possible to make ethical decisions, especially regarding your own actions. Some people just choose not to for personal gain. As a German, i cannot accept that kind of "I had no choice, i was just following orders/the rules" as an excuse for horrific behaviour. Else working at Auschwitz would also have been completely fine. After all, they were just following the law and the orders given to them. I said the words 'as CEO' Everyone immediately jumps down my throat and says he could not take the job, quit or refuse to do his job, all of which make him not a CEO. Engage brains, then reply, people. I agree with the insanity of the situation. The whole of US healthcare is insane. Shooting a CEO doesn't fix it, because the next guy will do the same thing. How come the CEOs of the competitors didn't go to such lengths? Did they lose their jobs?
They didn’t deviate massively either.
I think people are missing the forest for the trees as per Jock’s point which is that you’ve a system that incentivises certain behaviours, and whatever individual in situ will direct things accordingly.
Maybe some individuals are more ruthless and shitty than others, but they’re still somewhat tethered to those systems.
Our society is chock fucking full of ruthless, self-interested folks even within normal parameters, never mind folks with genuine psychopathic traits. There’s no shortage of people to step up and do that kind of gig
|
On December 07 2024 01:18 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 01:03 maybenexttime wrote:On December 07 2024 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On December 06 2024 23:57 Simberto wrote:On December 06 2024 23:41 Jockmcplop wrote:
Its like I said, as CEO of that company he had no choice but to do what he did.
Try explaining to shareholders that they could be making more money, but you'd have to harm alot of people so you won't do it.
See how that goes down.
Its not like the next CEO is all of a sudden going to put human well being above profit.
Its cliche now, but what Carlin said was correct. This system only cares about humans until they're born. That is insane. You can just not take the job. Or behave like a human being and get fired. Or whatever. No one forces you to harm people for profit. It is possible to make ethical decisions, especially regarding your own actions. Some people just choose not to for personal gain. As a German, i cannot accept that kind of "I had no choice, i was just following orders/the rules" as an excuse for horrific behaviour. Else working at Auschwitz would also have been completely fine. After all, they were just following the law and the orders given to them. I said the words 'as CEO' Everyone immediately jumps down my throat and says he could not take the job, quit or refuse to do his job, all of which make him not a CEO. Engage brains, then reply, people. I agree with the insanity of the situation. The whole of US healthcare is insane. Shooting a CEO doesn't fix it, because the next guy will do the same thing. How come the CEOs of the competitors didn't go to such lengths? Did they lose their jobs? They didn’t deviate massively either. I think people are missing the forest for the trees as per Jock’s point which is that you’ve a system that incentivises certain behaviours, and whatever individual in situ will direct things accordingly. Maybe some individuals are more ruthless and shitty than others, but they’re still somewhat tethered to those systems. Our society is chock fucking full of ruthless, self-interested folks even within normal parameters, never mind folks with genuine psychopathic traits. There’s no shortage of people to step up and do that kind of gig
I think there are simply two levels at play here. One is the systemic one. Our system incentivises and rewards unethical behaviour in a lot of positions.
The second is the individual level. Even if the system encourages being an asshole, that does not remove the responsibility from the individual to not be an asshole.
Both positions are valid and relevant.
|
On December 07 2024 01:30 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 01:18 WombaT wrote:On December 07 2024 01:03 maybenexttime wrote:On December 07 2024 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On December 06 2024 23:57 Simberto wrote:On December 06 2024 23:41 Jockmcplop wrote:
Its like I said, as CEO of that company he had no choice but to do what he did.
Try explaining to shareholders that they could be making more money, but you'd have to harm alot of people so you won't do it.
See how that goes down.
Its not like the next CEO is all of a sudden going to put human well being above profit.
Its cliche now, but what Carlin said was correct. This system only cares about humans until they're born. That is insane. You can just not take the job. Or behave like a human being and get fired. Or whatever. No one forces you to harm people for profit. It is possible to make ethical decisions, especially regarding your own actions. Some people just choose not to for personal gain. As a German, i cannot accept that kind of "I had no choice, i was just following orders/the rules" as an excuse for horrific behaviour. Else working at Auschwitz would also have been completely fine. After all, they were just following the law and the orders given to them. I said the words 'as CEO' Everyone immediately jumps down my throat and says he could not take the job, quit or refuse to do his job, all of which make him not a CEO. Engage brains, then reply, people. I agree with the insanity of the situation. The whole of US healthcare is insane. Shooting a CEO doesn't fix it, because the next guy will do the same thing. How come the CEOs of the competitors didn't go to such lengths? Did they lose their jobs? They didn’t deviate massively either. I think people are missing the forest for the trees as per Jock’s point which is that you’ve a system that incentivises certain behaviours, and whatever individual in situ will direct things accordingly. Maybe some individuals are more ruthless and shitty than others, but they’re still somewhat tethered to those systems. Our society is chock fucking full of ruthless, self-interested folks even within normal parameters, never mind folks with genuine psychopathic traits. There’s no shortage of people to step up and do that kind of gig I think there are simply two levels at play here. One is the systemic one. Our system incentivises and rewards unethical behaviour in a lot of positions. The second is the individual level. Even if the system encourages being an asshole, that does not remove the responsibility from the individual to not be an asshole. Both positions are valid and relevant.
I don't see CEOs as individuals really.
Their actions are dictated by market forces.
As a human being, there is always a choice.
The relevant choice here is between doing the right thing or being the CEO of a health insurance company.
The idea that he should have been a nice, moral CEO of a health insurance company is absolutely laughable to me.
Either way, like I said before, I'm not going to celebrate killing a guy when it will have little to zero effect on anything. All it does is distract from what needs to happen.
|
On December 07 2024 01:17 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 00:03 oBlade wrote:
Working at a health insurance company isn't the fucking Holocaust, whether you are German or Austrian or anything else. Coming up with more efficient ways to take medicine from sick people is a movie villain job description.
Yes but he was very very very rich and those folks on the right think that very rich people are great.
Then they show exactly absolutely zero empathy when poor people who didn’t deny kids with cancer their medicines out of greed get murdered in Gaza.
Different values i guess.
But yeah the more i read about him the more certain i am that guy was an absolute pos. I don’t support assassinations because i don’t think it is ever a way to make the world a better place, but good effing riddance.
|
This notion that companies do something wrong rather then the people making the decisions and acting upon those decisions is just mind boggling to me.
Companies don't decide to screw over people, people do.
|
On December 07 2024 01:57 Gorsameth wrote:
This notion that companies do something wrong rather then the people making the decisions and acting upon those decisions is just mind boggling to me.
Companies don't decide to screw over people, people do.
It’s a funny thing that the same people who defend the invisible hand of the market and that the capitalist system and its values are good then defend people doing horrendous things because it’s not them, but the system. Makes no sense.
|
On December 07 2024 01:57 Gorsameth wrote:
This notion that companies do something wrong rather then the people making the decisions and acting upon those decisions is just mind boggling to me.
Companies don't decide to screw over people, people do.
Imagine a shareholder meeting, Mr just got shot goes in and says "sorry guys, we aren't growing this year because people actually need this healthcare and denying it to them is immoral" what do you think happens?
The shareholders go read a book about morality and then agree that the best thing to do is be nice to the patients?
I reckon they would sack him and replace him with someone who would make them their money.
People are acting like this asshole was the only asshole in the world, and that shooting him means Ghandi is going to go take his job.
|
On December 07 2024 02:04 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 01:57 Gorsameth wrote:
This notion that companies do something wrong rather then the people making the decisions and acting upon those decisions is just mind boggling to me.
Companies don't decide to screw over people, people do. Imagine a shareholder meeting, Mr just got shot goes in and says "sorry guys, we aren't growing this year because people actually need this healthcare and denying it to them is immoral" what do you think happens? The shareholders go read a book about morality and then agree that the best thing to do is be nice to the patients? I reckon they would sack him and replace him with someone who would make them their money. People are acting like this asshole was the only asshole in the world, and that shooting him means Ghandi is going to go take his job. You assume the shareholders will fire him for not being the worst piece of shit imaginable. And if they do they are assholes themselves, and they can try to find someone else who can do the job and is willing to spend the rest of his life looking over his shoulder.
This mans death doesn't make the world a better place, but this is a possible consequence of ruining peoples lives in a country with more guns then people.
The problem isn't capitalism, its not corporations, its people. We do this, not some invisible hand we have no power over.
ps. the notion that you can't grow as an insurance if your not a piece of shit is false. The entire business is based on spreading risk and spreading cost with a bit on top for profit. You can be a moral health insurance company and make a profit, you just make less profit then being an amoral insurance company.
|
We just need single payer full stop
|
On December 07 2024 02:11 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2024 02:04 Jockmcplop wrote:On December 07 2024 01:57 Gorsameth wrote:
This notion that companies do something wrong rather then the people making the decisions and acting upon those decisions is just mind boggling to me.
Companies don't decide to screw over people, people do. Imagine a shareholder meeting, Mr just got shot goes in and says "sorry guys, we aren't growing this year because people actually need this healthcare and denying it to them is immoral" what do you think happens? The shareholders go read a book about morality and then agree that the best thing to do is be nice to the patients? I reckon they would sack him and replace him with someone who would make them their money. People are acting like this asshole was the only asshole in the world, and that shooting him means Ghandi is going to go take his job. The problem isn't capitalism, its not corporations, its people. We do this, not some invisible hand we have no power over.
I fundamentally disagree with this. Its a great way of avoiding any serious reform in anything at all ever though. Its just individuals causing all our problems, get rid of the right individuals and everything will be just fine.
Let's try some more examples:
Its not the Catholic Church that's causing the problems with child abuse, its just individuals within the church.
Its not the IDF murdering tons of women and children, its just individuals who work for the IDF.
Can you see the problem? Sometimes there actually is an invisible hand guiding people's behaviour, and it is made of laws and regulations.
|
McDonalds continues to make more money than it costs to make hamburgers - even though some people are hungry, even if they can't buy a hamburger. Yet their CEO makes tens of millions - worth at least millions of hamburgers. Will any brave SCOTUS-grenade tossing revolutionary genius volunteer to take the mantle on this one? Not endorsing it but who would shed any tears I mean. Knowing McDonalds they'd probably just commemorate the killing by offering a limited edition Sad Meal.
|
On December 07 2024 02:13 Sadist wrote:
We just need single payer full stop
I agree, although I don't know a realistic path to get there, given the resistance by all Republican leaders and most Democratic leaders.
|
People didn't talk about this CEO before because most people weren't aware of his existence and there were other topics like the US elections. People are talking about this CEO now because his head hit the cement.
Same reason why people don't generally talk about serial killers until they're caught.
There's no gotcha in the fact that people talk about something only after it makes the news.
This CEO is on par with a serial killer. Anyone here wanting to raise their hand in defense of serial killers TM? oBlade, you perhaps?
Yeah, didn't think so.
|
On December 07 2024 02:17 oBlade wrote:
McDonalds continues to make more money than it costs to make hamburgers - even though some people are hungry, even if they can't buy a hamburger. Yet their CEO makes tens of millions - worth at least millions of hamburgers. Will any brave SCOTUS-grenade tossing revolutionary genius volunteer to take the mantle on this one? Not endorsing it but who would shed any tears I mean. Knowing McDonalds they'd probably just commemorate the killing by offering a limited edition Sad Meal.
The problem is not about making money. The problem is about making money in a horrifying way that has horrendous human consequences. I just don’t see how you don’t understand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
