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

[Vermillion]

 

[Vermillion]

 

[Cesar]

 

still impressed how fast he was able to find a good lawyer

[Bloo]

3 minutes ago, Cesar said:

 

still impressed how fast he was able to find a good lawyer

Mangione's attorney ATE that answer up.  

[hawx23]

1 hour ago, Capris Groove said:

Are you not Canadian, like me? For your whole life you've never had to worry about paying for health care. It doesn't even register in your mind. Think about how it would feel to be afraid that if you fall down in the street and break your ankle, or get diagnosed with a disease, you would not be able to afford the care you received. Americans have tried every other way to get medicare for all and have been systematically shut down every time, are you really surprised someone would become radical about it?

To be honest if you live in a state like New York, you either get Medicare or qualify for an exchange insurance. I have a self-employed friend who freelances so he doesn't have insurance from work. He makes $48k a year. He's on a Bronze plan in the exchange and he pays $62 a month for insurance including dental. 

[hawx23]

7 minutes ago, Bloo said:

Mangione's attorney ATE that answer up.  

To be honest it's a basic answer and the metaphor doesn't really work. Billionaires are still subject to campaign contribution limits. Attorney representation is a private transaction with no public element (eg, I can pay for your plumber if you agree and it wouldn't affect anyone). There are also ethical attorney-client considerations at play when third parties pay for attorney representation. So the metaphor doesn't work and the response is shallow PR speak rather than an actual legal argument. 

[Cesar]

14 minutes ago, hawx23 said:

To be honest if you live in a state like New York, you either get Medicare or qualify for an exchange insurance. I have a self-employed friend who freelances so he doesn't have insurance from work. He makes $48k a year. He's on a Bronze plan in the exchange and he pays $62 a month for insurance including dental. 

Medicare is still shitty here in New York. Nothing except the very basics are covered. After the age of 18, they don't cover anything essential or prevantive. Doctors who take medicare are overrun by patients. 

[no_better]

Just donated a small amount for his legal bills via givesendgo. Stay strong Luigi

[Bloo]

3 minutes ago, hawx23 said:

To be honest it's a basic answer and the metaphor doesn't really work. Billionaires are still subject to campaign contribution limits.

This is patently false. Elon Musk donated more than $200 million to elect Donald Trump. This is done through financial machinations that allow the rich and well-connected to avoid the $3,300 limit for individual donations (e.g., SuperPACs). Depending on how you funnel your financial investments in electoral campaigns, you can actually have "unlimited" contributions as per the FEC [link].

 

Quote

Attorney representation is a private transaction with no public element (eg, I can pay for your plumber if you agree and it wouldn't affect anyone). There are also ethical attorney-client considerations at play when third parties pay for attorney representation. So the metaphor doesn't work and the response is shallow PR speak rather than an actual legal argument. 

This part is very disconnected to the point. If public servants can take effectively unlimited contributions from billionaires, then why should it matter if the public is crowdsourcing a private attorney who is not a public servant? The higher standard should be placed on politicians, but mainstream media turns a blind eye to that issue and is instead focusing on the latter.

[ANTIclimatic]

55 minutes ago, Cesar said:

I believe everything will fall into place inevitably. Since 2016, the elites have lost their way to control the narratives they feed us. Americans don't trust mainstream media like they used to. 

 

The Trump presidency, will awaken people to the corruption that is has been happening in the government. As our rights and freedoms are taken away, and people see that the government has been more alligned with corporate interests instead of the interests of the people. (Taxation without represenation) more people will feel the urge to get involved. 

 

Think about massive wave social justice brought to the forefront in 2020, it all kinda died down once Biden came into office. Everyone assumed the work was done once we voted them in. If Democrats want to stop the work of the far right & MAGA republicans, they'll have to give up their neoliberal, pro-elite ways. Otherwise, it's not going to work.

 

Also put in perspective, this man was a rich guy, who even he got angry with the system. If a well privileged man, the same kind of man this country tries to shape our men into being  got this angry at the system. I can only imagine how many hundreds if not thousands of other people who feel the same way. Obviously most wouldn't dare to take it the route he choose. 

 

These things do not happen overnight, they happen gradually.

Haven't we been using this narrative since 2016 as well? When have Americans unilaterally supported mainstream media? I can remember phrases like unbiased news, non partisan new, etc being used since I was a kid.

 

We already know that the government is corrupt and I would reckon we're still in the "awakening" that the 2016 presidential election brought us. How would a second trump presidency somehow change our perspective from the 2016 one? We saw trans rights attacked, unbridled discrimination on Arab/muslims, concentration camps for migrants, the separation and disappearance of migrant children, racist attacks, rape apologies, tax cuts for the rich, the abysmal handling of a global pandemic. We been knew this, so what would change now? And isn't this just the acceleration mindset?

 

Won't the social wave die down once the next democrat is elected anyways? This time it won't be a Biden but I have a hard time believing that we're gonna get even a Warren as our next democratic candidate. I haven't spoken to or know a single person who thought that Biden was our savior. We simply fell in line and collectively picked the candidate that we thought would have the best chance of winning and that meant going back to the "good" old days of the Obama administration. Have we gotten a truly left leaning (for the time) non centrists democrats after Reagan? Obama was centrist as **** and ran on some conservative ass promises and that is what we wanted back in 2020. And Clinton showed that pandering to the right and being centrist was a winning strategy that they've been following ever since.

 

I'm still hearing so many things about this dude come out to even base a character study. I'm hearing that he was cutoff around last year and didn't have his parents support and I'm also hearing that he made the gun even before he picked the ceo as a target. And apparently his family ironically made their wealth running health institutions. I'm seeing a lot pointing to that fact that he discovered that he wasn't as privileged as he thought and that profoundly affected his sense of self. I don't really care about dude much but can we think about why most wouldn't take the same route? What differences between him and the other and less well off people who were stepped on?

 

Lastly how will others get involved and what route would they need to take? If most won't do what he did and if that action was what needed to be done then what is there for the common man to do?

[ANTIclimatic]

1 hour ago, Cain said:

A mentally sound person would look at the state of the world and take action, because lord knows none of the people in power are

What action are you willing to take?

[Capris Groove]

1 hour ago, Bloo said:

Not to focus on personal anecdotes, but I'm a fairly healthy person—low cholesterol, good blood pressure, etc. But, in college I randomly had a seizure out of nowhere. I would continue to have them once every 5-6 months until my neurologists were able to find a medication dosage that worked to keep my brain happy. However, in that time, I would have beg any roommates I had that if I have a seizure to just let me seize unless my head was busted open or something. Why? Well, the ER is just too damn expensive. I recently had a seizure towards the start of this year (because I wasn't able to get my medication, but I'll excise those details for brevity). But, this seizure happened while I was at work. I didn't take any serious injuries at all. I passed out, no head injuries, but I did convulse and my co-workers panicked and called 911. I came to on a stretcher being escorted out of my workplace and put into an ambulance. There is a hospital 1 block from my workplace. Despite that proximity to healthcare and my health insurance, my ER visit cost $3000 that I had to pay out of pocket after my insurance coverage. An ER visit for a seizure is just having you rest, giving you an over-the-counter medication for headaches, asking about your history, and giving you your prescription if you're out. That's it. Nothing super complicated, but it still cost an inordinate amount of money.

 

Again, I'm a fairly healthy person (*knocks on wood*) and I still fear the idea of going to a hospital. It is very easy to become radicalized on healthcare in America. I've heard stories where people are charged $1000 for simply waiting in an ER room before leaving to get care elsewhere because the wait was too long. The system is so broken that it should surprise no one that people cannot extend empathy to an architect of a system that has nothing but apathy for them and the lives of their loved ones.

My blood boils with rage when I read stories like this. I'm sorry, I don't know what to say that you don't already know.

 

Healthcare is a human right. Bottom line.

[Capris Groove]

1 hour ago, hawx23 said:

To be honest if you live in a state like New York, you either get Medicare or qualify for an exchange insurance. I have a self-employed friend who freelances so he doesn't have insurance from work. He makes $48k a year. He's on a Bronze plan in the exchange and he pays $62 a month for insurance including dental. 

Okay, but do we guarantee that it covers everything? Or do you have to go line-by-line in a million page document looking up procedure codes and hoping to God yours is covered? 'Cuz half the anger I'm seeing from people is that they thought they were covered until something actually happened, and suddenly they're out thousands of $. Like Bloo's post above.

[Riverbank]

 

He's our modern day princess Diana

 

[Cesar]

6 minutes ago, ANTIclimatic said:

Haven't we been using this narrative since 2016 as well? When have Americans unilaterally supported mainstream media? I can remember phrases like unbiased news, non partisan new, etc being used since I was a kid.

 

We already know that the government is corrupt and I would reckon we're still in the "awakening" that the 2016 presidential election brought us. How would a second trump presidency somehow change our perspective from the 2016 one? We saw trans rights attacked, unbridled discrimination on Arab/muslims, concentration camps for migrants, the separation and disappearance of migrant children, racist attacks, rape apologies, tax cuts for the rich, the abysmal handling of a global pandemic. We been knew this, so what would change now? And isn't this just the acceleration mindset?

 

Won't the social wave die down once the next democrat is elected anyways? This time it won't be a Biden but I have a hard time believing that we're gonna get even a Warren as our next democratic candidate. I haven't spoken to or know a single person who thought that Biden was our savior. We simply fell in line and collectively picked the candidate that we thought would have the best chance of winning and that meant going back to the "good" old days of the Obama administration. Have we gotten a truly left leaning (for the time) non centrists democrats after Reagan? Obama was centrist as **** and ran on some conservative ass promises and that is what we wanted back in 2020. And Clinton showed that pandering to the right and being centrist was a winning strategy that they've been following ever since.

 

I'm still hearing so many things about this dude come out to even base a character study. I'm hearing that he was cutoff around last year and didn't have his parents support and I'm also hearing that he made the gun even before he picked the ceo as a target. And apparently his family ironically made their wealth running health institutions. I'm seeing a lot pointing to that fact that he discovered that he wasn't as privileged as he thought and that profoundly affected his sense of self. I don't really care about dude much but can we think about why most wouldn't take the same route? What differences between him and the other and less well off people who were stepped on?

 

Lastly how will others get involved and what route would they need to take? If most won't do what he did and if that action was what needed to be done then what is there for the common man to do?

The american people still had some sort of trust in the media back in 2016. compared to now where networks are seeing terrible ratings, people are getting their information from other sources.

 

people have now witnessed the blatant contradictions and the censorship, when you compare what the main stream media is telling you, vs primary sources & independent journalists on tiktok for example. israel had one of the best public relations, until tiktok came around. The disconnection between the media and what people has never been so blatantly obvious before. 

 

this presidency, is gonna be vastly different. incompetent billionaire cabinet members whos sole focus is to make their department essentially inefficient.  alot of the protections from his first term are no longer there, and given the supreme court has granted him ultimate immunity. even more unchecked corporate greed, consumer protection, media censorship (they are already threatening journalists), and most importantly climate change.

 

the thing is if democrats want to win next election, and bring this country away from techno-fascism, they are going to become the party of the people again instead of the elite corporate donors. they are not gonna win doing another Harris/Hilary type campaign, even with a white man being the face of it.

 

there are other options other than violence especially post-luigi. his actions have brought alot of awareness. 

[Likingstars]

2 hours ago, Cesar said:

 

still impressed how fast he was able to find a good lawyer

Damn thats a good response 

[Sergi91]

34 minutes ago, Riverbank said:

 

He's our modern day princess Diana

 

Who did she kill? 

[ANTIclimatic]

5 minutes ago, Cesar said:

The american people still had some sort of trust in the media back in 2016. compared to now where networks are seeing terrible ratings, people are getting their information from other sources.

 

people have now witnessed the blatant contradictions and the censorship, when you compare what the main stream media is telling you, vs primary sources & independent journalists on tiktok for example. israel had one of the best public relations, until tiktok came around. The disconnection between the media and what people has never been so blatantly obvious before. 

 

this presidency, is gonna be vastly different. incompetent billionaire cabinet members whos sole focus is to make their department essentially inefficient.  alot of the protections from his first term are no longer there, and given the supreme court has granted him ultimate immunity. even more unchecked corporate greed, consumer protection, media censorship (they are already threatening journalists), and most importantly climate change.

 

the thing is if democrats want to win next election, and bring this country away from techno-fascism, they are going to become the party of the people again instead of the elite corporate donors. they are not gonna win doing another Harris/Hilary type campaign, even with a white man being the face of it.

 

there are other options other than violence especially post-luigi. his actions have brought alot of awareness. 

Isn't this just the consequence of the rise of streaming and of social media not necessarily with lack of trust? My old ass parents watch their news on YouTube even though they still have cable and we of course don't pay for cable even though I do have access I just don't find it convenient.

 

Independent and social media can still be and is very biased and we've seen the rise of "incels" and conspiracy theorists from these alternative media. Yes news is more free and we get stories in real time but there is still a binary when it comes to source. A Jordan Peterson and a Russell brand viewer wouldn't necessarily overlap even though they are both right wing nor would a TYT or Hassan viewer necessarily overlap even if there's a familial connection there. We all kind of stay in our proto echo chambers and view the other news sources no matter how similar as fake/biased. And a lot of these have been around since forever, with in recent years we're seeing more outright fascist pop up. 
 

That's exactly what a lot of people voted for. Trumpies cheered for most of the cabinet picks with a lot getting recognition and support just by association. I don't think the ones who voted for him to censor education mind much that he plans to make the department of education useless. Trump picked RFK's half brained ass and trumpies acted like he was more qualified than an actual expert. We have Elon the total embodiment of corporate greed, consumer protection and media censorship as a cabinet member and none of them care. He attached himself to trump and we all knew his intentions and it still happened. Those who cared knew in advance and did nothing so I really don't see them mobilizing because we all know what was gonna happen, happen.

 

Honestly let's be cynical here. This might be one of the best things to happen for democrats post 2024. We all agree that they have the same donors so let the republicans **** it up and have the democrats come and once again "pick up the pieces". 2025 is gonna be rough with Ukraine and Gaza and at the end of the day they wiped their hands of having to pretend to deal with either crisis. If we all think that democrats are diet republicans then what makes you think they're gonna change now? 
 

What are the options?

[Capris Groove]

16 minutes ago, ANTIclimatic said:

Independent and social media can still be and is very biased and we've seen the rise of "incels" and conspiracy theorists from these alternative media. Yes news is more free and we get stories in real time but there is still a binary when it comes to source. A Jordan Peterson and a Russell brand viewer wouldn't necessarily overlap even though they are both right wing nor would a TYT or Hassan viewer necessarily overlap even if there's a familial connection there. We all kind of stay in our proto echo chambers and view the other news sources no matter how similar as fake/biased. And a lot of these have been around since forever, with in recent years we're seeing more outright fascist pop up.

I think the point is that there's often a huge disparity between the established media and public opinion, and it's now more obvious than ever. That's what's led to the explosion in independent/alternative sources. When you watch the news it's as if the Wizard of Oz is behind the curtain pulling the strings on what's allowed to be said and what isn't, no matter how popular it is. Look at this assassination - millions of people are now demanding universal healthcare - where is the mainstream news coverage on that? Nowhere. Why aren't they reporting that piece of factual news and pressing the healthcare insurance indsutry on it? That's not how journalism is supposed to work. The people determine the news and it's the media's job to consolidate it and report it, not the other way around.

Edited December 12 by Capris Groove

[sweetblindness]

Not to be that guy, but is there any source that says that Luigi couldn't get care from United Healthcare for his spondylolisthesis? I know he had spondylolisthesis, but I have yet to read anything saying that UHC specifically wouldn't cover the care for it.

[Sannie]

6 minutes ago, sweetblindness said:

Not to be that guy, but is there any source that says that Luigi couldn't get care from United Healthcare for his spondylolisthesis? I know he had spondylolisthesis, but I have yet to read anything saying that UHC specifically wouldn't cover the care for it.

Also, if he was as wealthy as people are claiming, how is not getting coverage a problem? Just pay for it? I'm all for class solidarity from the rich but I'd love to know the real reasoning.

[Jay07]

1 hour ago, Sergi91 said:

Who did she kill? 

The monarchy and we thank her for it 

[Communion]

3 hours ago, hawx23 said:

To be honest if you live in a state like New York, you either get Medicare or qualify for an exchange insurance. I have a self-employed friend who freelances so he doesn't have insurance from work. He makes $48k a year. He's on a Bronze plan in the exchange and he pays $62 a month for insurance including dental. 

You...realize most private insurance plans with low monthly premiums then have high deductibles, right?

 

I also think you're confusing Medicaid for Medicare. Only seniors and the disabled qualify for Medicare. 

 

Having a low premium, high deductible health insurance plan is like having dollar a day car insurance. Yes, the money you have to pay monthly is much less, but if you actually need to use your plan, you then have to usually pay out of pocket any costs before the *very high* deductible is paid off. 

 

Cynics and those who support for-profit insurance go "well these types are plans are perfect for healthy young people who don't have much need for healthcare anyway" but the entire point is a healthy person shouldn't go bankrupt from a random medical emergency or catastrophy like a cancer diagnosis. 

 

You don't have good health insurance if you can't actually afford to use it to seek healthcare. 

Edited December 12 by Communion

[ANTIclimatic]

5 minutes ago, Capris Groove said:

I think the point is that there's often a huge disparity between the established media and public opinion, and it's now more obvious than ever. That's what's led to the explosion in independent/alternative sources. When you watch the news it's as if the Wizard of Oz is behind the curtain pulling the strings on what's allowed to be said and what isn't, no matter how popular it is. Look at this assassination - millions of people are now demanding universal healthcare - where is the mainstream news coverage on that? Nowhere. Why aren't they reporting that piece of factual news? That's not how journalism is supposed to work. The people determine the news and it's the media's job to consolidate it and report it, not the other way around.

I don't disagree like at all I just don't see this great awakening happening where this unifies us to "fight" (I still want to know how) for our rights. I've said this previously but we've been demanding universal healthcare since forever and this just made it the trending topic. I really want this high, if there's even still one to last so we can actually make noise but if the noise is just how supposedly hot this dude is then what are we doing here? I'm not saying that there's little talk of the actual issues but it's kinda crazy just how memeified this got. What's the call to action if we're all just laying in bed liking tweets on how he snapped because he wasn't getting any *****?

[ANTIclimatic]

13 minutes ago, Sannie said:

Also, if he was as wealthy as people are claiming, how is not getting coverage a problem? Just pay for it? I'm all for class solidarity from the rich but I'd love to know the real reasoning.

I'm hearing he might've gotten cut off