Current Brian Thompson United Healthcare CEO Ambushed & Killed - Manhattan US * Penn graduate Luigi Mangione arrested

[HirdsTheWord]

How about not giving our gas reserves away for free? And letting corporations exploit us.
Seems to work in countries like Norway … 76% tax on resources.

Norways healthcare system also in incorporates and relies on private companies. They just have much more rigorous regulations and governance.

Which is exactly the point. We need private companies in health care systems. They just need to be regulated correctly.

 

[Cactus_]

I'm asking what do we want our aged care facilities to work towards? Is it looking after our parents until their quality of life declines? Or is it maintaining them until they cannot stay alive? How do we want to pay for their services?

It depends on the preference of the patient or resident

If people feel like they’ve lived long enough and don’t have any quality of life then they can refuse treatments, life saving measures and in some instance elect for euthanasia

If people want to keep on living then we try to give them that wish

And although there are a lot of big picture financial decisions in healthcare we don’t use financial considerations as the basis of where someone - an individual - lives or dies (here in Australia that is)

 

[nut]

Norways healthcare system also in incorporates and relies on private companies. They just have much more rigorous regulations and governance.

Which is exactly the point. We need privateeee companies in health care systems. They just need to be regulated correctly.

Strange reply when you asked how to fund it? 2 trillion in a resource funded Sovereign fund helps.


When a government can negotiate for medical supplies and services etc… they have a bit more bargaining power.
What sets a purely public system apart for private is preventative health.

Norway is also investing in 6 billion euro into a medical science etc….

Just stop giving our resources away for free.

 

[faible]

I agree in principle in a perfect world but how do you propose it is funded than, if profit is entirely removed from the system?

u wot?

Plenty of things are run as not-for-profit.

The AFL is a not-for-profit for example. Whether it should be is a whole different argument.

 

[faible]

Actually HTW's entire reply was a goalpost shifting exercise.

 

[Osho]

$50 for an Asthma inhaler …. USA USA USA

It's the legalised graft of elected officials and parties, who have agreed to surrender people's rights to rich folk presenting fat envelopes.

 

[jason_recliner]

$50 for an Asthma inhaler …. USA USA USA

I pay $35. Less, but still extortionate for something that I can't live well without and need to use every day, IMO.

 

[faible]

I pay $35. Less, but still extortionate for something that I can't live well without and need to use every day, IMO.

Is that with or without a script?

 

[jason_recliner]

Is that with or without a script?

Prescription-only preventative inhaler.

 

[Cyber_punk]

----

He started a fire

 

[Pamcake1]

The below article is very interesting.
One of my gift articles from my subscription.

Opinion | The Unabomber’s Influence Is Deeper and More Dangerous Than We Know

To some disaffected young Americans, the ruthlessly intellectualized turn to violence can seem justified. It is not.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Kurve]

This is quite funny, inmates are watching NewsNation from the inside and yelling out the answers.

 

[faible]

The below article is very interesting.
One of my gift articles from my subscription.

Opinion | The Unabomber’s Influence Is Deeper and More Dangerous Than We Know

To some disaffected young Americans, the ruthlessly intellectualized turn to violence can seem justified. It is not.

www.nytimes.com

Good article, but he poses a question (in bold) and yet can't pose an answer.

He can tell people why Kaczynki is a bad guy, but if you can't find a way to address that deep discontent and disparity in society, where white collar administrators can effectively leave millions subject to pain and suffering, financial ruin and death, with no recourse, then it's not going to improve.

It feels like the media just can't quite understand why there's so much support for the actions of Mangione despite being ever so close to identifying it.

So what do you say to a young person who has come to admire Mr. Kaczynski? I share many of the same frustrations over the state of the world as those of the college students I teach — how we are bound up in and complicit in horrors across the globe without a viable political alternative to chart a new way forward. How do we maintain our humanity in an inhumane system, where people die unnecessarily every hour on the streets of the richest country in the world?

I did give an answer to the teacher’s question, the best one I could. I told him to tell his students that Mr. Kaczynski was cruel, that he tortured dogs and took pleasure in imagining the suffering of others; to read not only his manifesto, which he polished for public consumption, but also his diaries. There they would see what kind of man he was. I told him that the Unabomber’s philosophy was taken from thinkers like Jacques Ellul and Lewis Mumford, who never killed anyone, and urged him to teach his students about their work.

I hope my words reached them. And I hope they understood that what Mr. Kaczynski represents is not a new way forward or an answer to the injustices of the modern world, but another turn of the wheel of violence that brought us here.

 

[DapperDon]

This is quite funny, inmates are watching NewsNation from the inside and yelling out the answers.

This really is The Joker movie coming to reality. Sounds like he'll be king in prison.

 

[ms finch]

Good article, but he poses a question (in bold) and yet can't pose an answer.

He can tell people why Kaczynki is a bad guy, but if you can't find a way to address that deep discontent and disparity in society, where white collar administrators can effectively leave millions subject to pain and suffering, financial ruin and death, with no recourse, then it's not going to improve.

It feels like the media just can't quite understand why there's so much support for the actions of Mangione despite being ever so close to identifying it.

The US has had so many opportunities to address disparity, particularly in the health system, and they baulk at it every time.

Sanders wanted affordable healthcare and safety nets for healthcare, amongst other social safety nets. He also wanted to address issues with political donations, that allow huge companies to effectively control politicians and elections. He was considered far too socialist, despite the fact that most Western capitalist countries have social safety nets and he'd be considered centrist in those countries. True, Sanders was never the candidate that the public had the opportunity to vote for, but the people voting even within the Dems thought he was too socialist, and certainly too socialist to appear to the public, which was ultimately demonstrated to be accurate.

Clinton wanted to investigate a scheme similar to our PBS.

Harris was in favour of more affordable healthcare options, but particularly, Harris was a champion of greater equality, which is essential for good healthcare.

It's certainly possible for politicians to do something once they are in power. Obama brought in the ACA, which changed the scope of healthcare across the US in numerous ways. Nonetheless he also faced resistance to it because, again, it appeared too socialist.

So they elected Trump, who has a lot more in common with the UHC CEO than he does the alleged perpetrator, or any of the people who have been screwed over by the health system. Trump wants to pare back affordable healthcare by winding back the ACA, dismantling EMTALA, and having the FDA put greater controls on a whole raft of drugs.

The problem is the US obsession with unfettered capitalism. They haven't figured out that having social safety nets is not reds hiding under your bed and that unfettered capitalism doesn't mean opportunities for everyone but that the rich get richer and anyone not rich just gets totally f**ked over. They'd rather support this ludicrous "ideal" and people shooting each other than do anything substantive about their healthcare system.

 

[craffles]

The US has had so many opportunities to address disparity, particularly in the health system, and they baulk at it every time.

Sanders wanted affordable healthcare and safety nets for healthcare, amongst other social safety nets. He also wanted to address issues with political donations, that allow huge companies to effectively control politicians and elections. He was considered far too socialist, despite the fact that most Western capitalist countries have social safety nets and he'd be considered centrist in those countries. True, Sanders was never the candidate that the public had the opportunity to vote for, but the people voting even within the Dems thought he was too socialist, and certainly too socialist to appear to the public, which was ultimately demonstrated to be accurate.

Clinton wanted to investigate a scheme similar to our PBS.

Harris was in favour of more affordable healthcare options, but particularly, Harris was a champion of greater equality, which is essential for good healthcare.

It's certainly possible for politicians to do something once they are in power. Obama brought in the ACA, which changed the scope of healthcare across the US in numerous ways. Nonetheless he also faced resistance to it because, again, it appeared too socialist.

So they elected Trump, who has a lot more in common with the UHC CEO than he does the alleged perpetrator, or any of the people who have been screwed over by the health system. Trump wants to pare back affordable healthcare by winding back the ACA, dismantling EMTALA, and having the FDA put greater controls on a whole raft of drugs.

The problem is the US obsession with unfettered capitalism. They haven't figured out that having social safety nets is not reds hiding under your bed and that unfettered capitalism doesn't mean opportunities for everyone but that the rich get richer and anyone not rich just gets totally f**ked over. They'd rather support this ludicrous "ideal" and people shooting each other than do anything substantive about their healthcare system.

Well articulated, agree 1000%

 

[CD Xbow]

The US has had so many opportunities to address disparity, particularly in the health system, and they baulk at it every time.

Sanders wanted affordable healthcare and safety nets for healthcare, amongst other social safety nets. He also wanted to address issues with political donations, that allow huge companies to effectively control politicians and elections. He was considered far too socialist, despite the fact that most Western capitalist countries have social safety nets and he'd be considered centrist in those countries. True, Sanders was never the candidate that the public had the opportunity to vote for, but the people voting even within the Dems thought he was too socialist, and certainly too socialist to appear to the public, which was ultimately demonstrated to be accurate.

Clinton wanted to investigate a scheme similar to our PBS...

Many decades ago I met one of the architects of the attempted 'Clinton Care'. He was here as you say, to see how our health system worked. I had to entertain him for half a day. He was a smart bloke. Talking to him in the 90's made me first realise how totally stuffed the American health care system and I came to the conclusion ii was more concerned with increasing the wealth of investors than providing health to the people. It's an example of complete corruption of the intent of a system. He said, and I believe this to be true, that Australians are much more conciliatory than Americans and had a stronger sense of community and social good.

 

[ms finch]

Many decades ago I met one of the architects of the attempted 'Clinton Care'. He was here as you say, to see how our health system worked. I had to entertain him for half a day. He was a smart bloke. Talking to him in the 90's made me first realise how totally stuffed the American health care system and I came to the conclusion ii was more concerned with increasing the wealth of investors than providing health to the people. It's an example of complete corruption of the intent of a system. He said, and I believe this to be true, that Australians are much more conciliatory than Americans and had a stronger sense of community and social good.

That's fascinating. Thank you so much for sharing.

I remember not that long ago when the Liberal party here considered paring back Medicare. The reaction from the public was so swift and negative they abandoned it as a policy within a few weeks.

I agree there is a huge difference culturally. I don't think Australia is perfect by any means, but I think we are less individualistic than the US.

Nothing has changed over there in decades, and I don't believe this shooting will have any real impact. There is no real will to change it.

I have worked in women's reproductive rights on and off for over 2 decades, including in the US. When Roe v Wade was overturned with Dobbs, there was the same outrage amongst a large portion of the community. However, that outrage was channelled into floods of donations to abortion funds, offers of support for organisations, people sharing their expertise to figure out how to navigate the system, protests, and campaigns to support pro choice politicians and ballots on the issue at elections. The productive support was absolutely mammoth.

As a result of this, more women were able to access abortions in the year after Dobbs than in the year before; funds have the capacity to help people with medication, travel, accommodation and medical support; there are a number of websites that explain people's options to them so they can access the healthcare they need; blue states set up shield laws so medical professionals and women who travelled to their states would be protected; and laws to enshrine a woman's right to choose appeared on multiple ballots in the recent elections, passing in the vast majority.

I cannot begin to describe the despair, devastation and feelings of hopelessness amongst millions of people the day that ruling came down. But the people who have worked in this area were prepared for it and knew what needed to be done, and those same millions of people responded to those calls and made things happen. None of them went out and shot anyone to do it, either.

I don't see any of that type of thing amongst this outrage. There aren't mass donations to charities that help people with healthcare; there aren't people organising politically; there aren't people setting up websites to help others navigate the system. They're not doing anything because they're not interested in doing anything. I also ask myself why, given they have all apparently been so screwed over and outraged for so long, they needed a shooting to start any sort of conversation.

 

[Kurve]

It could be a death penalty case.

Luigi Mangione has been extradited to New York where he faces state charges including murder as an act of terrorism.

New federal charges have also been filed against him, including murder by firearm, which could bring the possibility of the death penalty if he is convicted.

Luigi Mangione could face death penalty under new federal charges

Accused CEO killer Luigi Mangione faces new federal charges of stalking and murder by firearm, the latter which could bring the possibility of the death penalty if he is convicted.

www.abc.net.au

 

[faible]

Becoming a bit of a joke now, shooting up a school full of kids will get one less time. Country is cooked.

 

[DapperDon]

Becoming a bit of a joke now, shooting up a school full of kids will get one less time. Country is cooked.

It's such a USA move, it fits them perfectly.

Don't shoot the elites

 

[ms finch]

It could be a death penalty case.

Luigi Mangione has been extradited to New York where he faces state charges including murder as an act of terrorism.

New federal charges have also been filed against him, including murder by firearm, which could bring the possibility of the death penalty if he is convicted.

Luigi Mangione could face death penalty under new federal charges

Accused CEO killer Luigi Mangione faces new federal charges of stalking and murder by firearm, the latter which could bring the possibility of the death penalty if he is convicted.

www.abc.net.au

I've been waiting for this.

I don't necessarily think the feds want to impose the death penalty, but that it is to be used as a bargaining chip to pressure him to plead. A perpetrator is far less likely to take the risk with a trial when death is on the table. It also gives them other options when it comes to the location of the trial and therefore a jury. It allows them to box him in a lot more.

The last thing the authorities want is a trial that gives him a platform for his commentary. (While I don't agree with the death penalty I certainly agree with the sentiment that someone like him should not be given a platform or the opportunity to be celebrated as a hero.)

IMO all the people crowing about him have only done a disservice to him overall, because the adulation and associated behaviour encouraged authorities to pursue a mechanism to shut him down.

 

[nobbyiscool]

You can shoot as many children or black people as you like, just don't threaten the oligarchy!

 

[ms finch]

You can shoot as many children or black people as you like, just don't threaten the oligarchy!

To me it's more about how messed up the public is in the US. They are more interested in celebrating the shooting of a healthcare executive than they are doing something about school children getting shot.

 

[Cataholic]

To me it's more about how messed up the public is in the US. They are more interested in celebrating the shooting of a healthcare executive than they are doing something about school children getting shot.

Yep. You just can't reason with an American about gun control.

They are utterly incapable of reasoning that their regular mass shootings are somehow equated to the proliferation of guns.

They have weapons far more powerful than are needed to drop a grizzly, but are prepared to sacrifice their kids each and every year rather than give up their right to carry those weapons.