news Insurance industry pressured DOJ to charge Luigi Mangione federally to deter copycats

[Cesar]

1 minute ago, New Edition said:

Okay so what's tea is Luigi the assassin or the guy who was denied coverage or both? And is it true he's a Trump supporter?

he's not a trump supporter, people saw some his tweets at face value and thought he was far right

[Xtina23]

1 hour ago, wastedpotential said:

Just when I think he can't get any dreamier

 

excuse you, I best not see you around this thread any more,

he's MINE!!

 

 

[Communion]

His manifesto being just a short 2 sweet paragraphs amounting to "insurance companies are exploiting us and so he had it coming!!!

 

Quote

Frankly, these parasites simply had it coming. A reminder: the US has the #1 most expensive healthcare system in the world, yet we rank roughly #42 in life expectancy. United is the [indecipherable] largest company in the US by market cap, behind only Apple, Google, Walmart. It has grown and grown, but as our life expectancy? No the reality is, these [indecipherable] have simply gotten too powerful, and they continue to abuse our country for immense profit because the American public has allwed them to get away with it. 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 10 by Communion

[Cesar]

 

Quote

"To the Feds, I'll keep this short, because I do respect what you do for our country. To save you a lengthy investigation, I state plainly that I wasn't working with anyone. This was fairly trivial: some elementary social engineering, basic CAD, a lot of patience. The spiral notebook, if present, has some straggling notes and To Do lists that illuminate the gist of it. My tech is pretty locked down because I work in engineering so probably not much info there. I do apologize for any strife of traumas but it had to be done. Frankly, these parasites simply had it coming. A reminder: the US has the #1 most expensive healthcare system in the world, yet we rank roughly #42 in life expectancy. United is the [indecipherable] largest company in the US by market cap, behind only Apple, Google, Walmart. It has grown and grown, but as our life expectancy? No the reality is, these [indecipherable] have simply gotten too powerful, and they continue to abuse our country for immense profit because the American public has allwed them to get away with it. Obviously the problem is more complex, but I do not have space, and frankly I do not pretend to be the most qualified person to lay out the full argument. But many have illuminated the corruption and greed (e.g.: Rosenthal, Moore), decades ago and the problems simply remain. It is not an issue of awareness at this point, but clearly power games at play. Evidently I am the first to face it with such brutal honesty."

 

[BOOMBAYAH]

8 minutes ago, New Edition said:

Okay so what's tea is Luigi the assassin or the guy who was denied coverage or both? And is it true he's a Trump supporter?

Quote

In more than a dozen emails and a two-hour-long video call, the two men had wide-ranging discussions. They agreed on some things, Mr. Bhogal said: Both men leaned toward the political left on some issues, and aligned with the right on others. For example, he said, Mr. Mangione supported equality of opportunity but doubted the efficacy of identity politics. "Overall, the impression I got of him, besides his curiosity and kindness, was a deep concern for the future of humanity and a determination to improve himself and the world," Mr. Bhogal added. According to Mr. Bhogal, Mr. Mangione mentioned health care briefly, complaining that it was too expensive in the United States and saying that he envied the nationalized health care system in the United Kingdom.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/12/10/nyregion/unitedhealthcare-ceo-luigi-mangione 

[CallumDavies]

It's incredibly depressing to widespread endorsement of vigilante culture. Undermining the principle of the rule of law also undermines democracy. If you want fairness, and justice then you shouldn't endorse killing CEOs in cold blood. No matter the motive. We're replacing accountability with subjectivity. 

 

When the rule of law is undermined, it's marginalised groups who suffer the most

[Communion]

Just now, CallumDavies said:

If you want fairness, and justice

People don't want fairness and justice, they wanna afford insulin and seeing a dentist without going bankrupt. 

[nadiamendell]

8 minutes ago, CallumDavies said:

It's incredibly depressing to widespread endorsement of vigilante culture. Undermining the principle of the rule of law also undermines democracy. If you want fairness, and justice then you shouldn't endorse killing CEOs in cold blood. No matter the motive. We're replacing accountability with subjectivity. 

 

When the rule of law is undermined, it's marginalised groups who suffer the most

There is NOTHING fair and just about the American healthcare industry. 

[Cyattie]

7 minutes ago, CallumDavies said:

It's incredibly depressing to widespread endorsement of vigilante culture. Undermining the principle of the rule of law also undermines democracy. If you want fairness, and justice then you shouldn't endorse killing CEOs in cold blood. No matter the motive. We're replacing accountability with subjectivity. 

 

When the rule of law is undermined, it's marginalised groups who suffer the most

What's concerning is that these CEOs are working in a system built to make them much richer, much faster than the working class. Beyond that, wasn't he and the rest of the healthcare company's team caught for like insider trading??? That's illegal, that's not working within our rule of law. 

 

Beyond that, the richest in North America carried out the largest wealth transfer in history in like 2020 - they are not interested in the peasants, I promise you, and perhaps some of them should rot oops. That'll help transfer back the wealth.

[CallumDavies]

2 minutes ago, Communion said:

People don't want fairness and justice, they wanna afford insulin and seeing a dentist without going bankrupt. 

Murdering CEOs of health insurance companies will not bring down the price of insulin or seeing a dentist. And even if it did, that is obviously not a moral position to hold. Killing people to achieve political, economic or social objectives is in effect terrorism.

 

Resorting to violence against healthcare CEOS or others is neither ethical nor effective in achieving political or social objectives. It undermines the rule of law, democracy and societal stability while alienating allies and inviting retaliation as well as more draconian police and state investigate powers. History strongly favours non violent, collective action to drive meaningful and sustainable change. 

 

FYI - endorsing the murder of someone in cold blood makes you a bad person!

 

[PrettyHurts]

Quote

frankly I do not pretend to be the most qualified person to lay out the full argument.

I'm crying. He knows he's just a tech bro who can barely write But his heart is in the right place. Kingie 

[CallumDavies]

1 minute ago, Cyattie said:

What's concerning is that these CEOs are working in a system built to make them much richer, much faster than the working class. Beyond that, wasn't he and the rest of the healthcare company's team caught for like insider trading??? That's illegal, that's not working within our rule of law. 

 

Beyond that, the richest in North America carried out the largest wealth transfer in history in like 2020 - they are not interested in the peasants, I promise you, and perhaps some of them should rot oops. That'll help transfer back the wealth.

The rule of law is not 'this person has committed a crime therefore I get to kill them'. 

 

It's a principle that is meant to ensure that all individuals, institutions, and governments are subject and accountable under the same set of laws. It is foundational to democratic societies and promotes fairness, justice and equality. It is obviously far from perfect. But picking off people at random is not an effective or moral response. And people who murder people in cold blood are bad people and should go to prison. 

[mathekr]

His manifesto does read a bit like someone who was struggling mentally tbf I guess the other notebook referenced will give a better look into his motives

Edited December 10 by mathekr

[DAP]

3 minutes ago, CallumDavies said:

Murdering CEOs of health insurance companies will not bring down the price of insulin or seeing a dentist. And even if it did, that is obviously not a moral position to hold. Killing people to achieve political, economic or social objectives is in effect terrorism.

 

Resorting to violence against healthcare CEOS or others is neither ethical nor effective in achieving political or social objectives. It undermines the rule of law, democracy and societal stability while alienating allies and inviting retaliation as well as more draconian police and state investigate powers. History strongly favours non violent, collective action to drive meaningful and sustainable change. 

 

FYI - endorsing the murder of someone in cold blood makes you a bad person!

 

The CEOs will be okay. They have enough money to afford the costs of being murdered. 

[Archetype]

19 minutes ago, Cesar said:

 

 

This doesn't sound like someone who would be passionate enough to murder a healthcare CEO.  People on this website say worse things about the healthcare industry on a weekly basis and yet none of us would ever do that.  Frankly these are things we already know and he doesn't even mention how one CEO's death is going to instigate any change.

Edited December 10 by Archetype

[Rush]

Quote

but I do not have space

He was holding space for Wicked 

[polygon]

19 minutes ago, CallumDavies said:

It's incredibly depressing to widespread endorsement of vigilante culture. Undermining the principle of the rule of law also undermines democracy. If you want fairness, and justice then you shouldn't endorse killing CEOs in cold blood. No matter the motive. We're replacing accountability with subjectivity. 

 

When the rule of law is undermined, it's marginalised groups who suffer the most

Cop(e)

[Jack!]

5 minutes ago, CallumDavies said:

It's incredibly depressing to widespread endorsement of vigilante culture. Undermining the principle of the rule of law also undermines democracy. If you want fairness, and justice then you shouldn't endorse killing CEOs in cold blood. No matter the motive. We're replacing accountability with subjectivity. 

 

When the rule of law is undermined, it's marginalised groups who suffer the most

Well, big medical insurance companies monopolising medicine and treatments that keep people alive is inherently undemocratic as it stands as its own separate issue. I wouldn't say there's a leg to stand on by questioning the morality of people who think what he's done is right - or at least understand the cause that drove him to do what he did. I understand you can have that opinion without necessarily standing by a premeditated crime/criminal. But, America have a stoic attitude towards treating this as a democratic issue because neither of the two-parties in the two-party race of the US political system have ever done enough in their manifesto to even try to reach free at the point of use healthcare. Marginalised groups are already suffering the most, because of democratic decisions made very recently. This doesn't change that.

[CallumDavies]

1 minute ago, DAP said:

The CEOs will be okay. They have enough money to afford the costs of being murdered. 

Not the ones that are dead, obviously.

 

This is a genuine and fundamental question about the society we want to live in. If you think it is okay, and in fact preferable, for ANYONE to murder ANY CEO of a healthcare company, where does the line get drawn?

 

If someone believes in something as passionately as you do about access to healthcare, but in something you disagree with. For example, climate change is real, trans are human rights etc. Whatever it is. Do you also then agree that is okay for them to kill anyone they think as responsible for those systems and movements?

 

As citizens, we should not want be individual arbiters of morality. If we take that power for ourselves, we give that to everyone. Including dangerous people we disagree with. The system isn't perfect. It protects the wrong people sometimes. But that is the compromise to live in a fairer, safer society than the alternative, lawless anarchy. 

[Communion]

9 minutes ago, CallumDavies said:

Murdering CEOs of health insurance companies will not bring down the price of insulin or seeing a dentist. And even if it did, that is obviously not a moral position to hold. Killing people to achieve political, economic or social objectives is in effect terrorism.

Yes, and to avoid continued acts of terrorism, American public officials must pass Medicare For All and quiet the beast that exists in many Americans ready to kill. 

 

Of course it is bad to murder. People have the capacity to do bad things. It is on the onus of politicians to build a society that encourages people to not want to do bad things. 

 

Clearly politicians have not done enough to make murdering insurance CEOs a moral ill and thus must rectify broken healthcare through legislation now or suffer through more Luigi's taking to vigilante violence. 

 

Medicare for All now. No other solutions are left. 

[CallumDavies]

5 minutes ago, polygon said:

Cop(e)

B(rain r)ot

[PrettyHurts]

10 minutes ago, CallumDavies said:

The rule of law is not 'this person has committed a crime therefore I get to kill them'. 

 

It's a principle that is meant to ensure that all individuals, institutions, and governments are subject and accountable under the same set of laws. It is foundational to democratic societies and promotes fairness, justice and equality. It is obviously far from perfect. But picking off people at random is not an effective or moral response. And people who murder people in cold blood are bad people and should go to prison. 

The rich dgaf about the rule of law tbh 

[CallumDavies]

1 minute ago, Communion said:

Yes, and to avoid continued acts of terrorism, American public officials must pass Medicare For All and quiet the beast that exists in many Americans ready to kill. 

 

Of course it is bad to murder. People have the capacity to do bad things. It is on the onus of politicians to build a society that encourages people to not want to do bad things. 

 

Clearly politicians have not done enough to make murdering insurance CEOs a moral ill and thus must rectify broken healthcare through legislation now or suffer through more Luigi's taking to vigilante violence. 

 

Medicare for All now. No other solutions are left. 

Using threats of violence is also terrorism. But I'm glad you agree with me that political consensus and democratic process (legislating) is the best way to achieve change. 

[Smarticle]

His new mugshot with the side profile 

[CallumDavies]

2 minutes ago, PrettyHurts said:

The rich dgaf about the rule of law tbh 

That is actually a reason to support the rule of law, not undermine it. We absolutely need a system where the principles and tenants of our democratic system apply to everyone. What we want to avoid, is regressing to a even less fair society, where no one access to any form of protection or justice. If we take away the rights of CEOs, we also take them away from normal working people. If we endorse a culture of vigilantism. We put ourselves and our loved ones in more danger. Choose a path.

 

And... murdering people in cold blood is bad. Hope that helps