Which is bad, and needs attention.

Probably woke zoomers

/S

If it’s elastic I don’t send it through the dryer.

Agree it’s objectively evil. I make no claim of some sick corporate martyrdom. But it’s inherently expected the corp will seek profit.

In so much as they are “operating as expected” yes.

In so much as they are trapped in the job? Obviously not. I guarantee that if this dude enacted policy to the likes of folks here, minimal to zero denial of service, he’d be out in a week.

It’s the system that is the root of the problem, and the politicians who build it.

This dude is a cog.

The board and shareholders determine the corporate goals. As the executive officer, the CEO enacts them.

That’s the system we have, not the ideal.

Edit The entire insurance industry is predicated on the approach of denying coverage when possible. The agressiveness to which they do so reflects the needs of the business. If they are pean, you can be sure they will deny more.

Be clear: I’m not excusing the behavior…they aren’t trapped in the job. I’m saying the behavior demonstrated is par for the course. A CEO in a capitalist system with profit driven shareholder obligations WILL behave this way.

Something like healthcare is the LAST thing such a person/organization should be involved with.

Further, this porson, if they had a magic change of heart wouldn’t change shit. They’d be replaced the same as if they were dead. Sure he’s very wealthy, but he’s a chump compared to the systems he’s a part of.

Huh? Denying claims but maintaining subscriber numbers seems quite transparent.

It’s not a law, it’s in every company bylaw. They obligate executive staff to work towards certain goals.

Well yes, he actively did. That made him a good CEO. Maximizing profits, being cutthroat, being egregious is exactly how a company wants their CEO to be, to enhance shareholder value.

I didn’t say he was not culpable. The opposite infact.

Hmm I think as it relates to critical things, I agree. (health and shelter). But insuring your jetski? I’m not sure the government needs to support that at-cost

I also believe, that if given the chance to work for the same paycheck, lots of loud lemmings would hush up about their position real quick. Money corrupts

The CEO is obligated to deliver profits to the board and shareholders. If they approve everything they go out of business. I’m not defending them, but they are a for profit, capitalist business. They lack empathy fundamentally.

Healthcare should not be a for profit venture, and it’s the government to blame for that.

I’m not saying this guy was clean, but he’s just a cog in a fancy suit with a big paycheck.

Limited empathy is totally fine. Cheering for assassinations is a different thing ( not saying you did).

I wish the systems this dude profited from were changed. This guy will just be replaced, and the next one will have a security detail ($$$)

Well put.

And when other groups you don’t agree with start sending “messages”?

Brazen broad daylight, “professional” (in this case well prepared), targeted. Corporate or politically motivated

Realistically it’s a stylistic thing, as we’ve seen countless such videos of similar killings

That would be best, but you can have multiple addresses in your acct. So say, if you happily used your acct at other addresses, then input an address in a risky zone, what should they do? Fractionally discount you at the end of the year maybe for that purchase vs all other purchases? Offer you to cancel at a prorate?

Completely agree, but lots of folks here are cheering for what amounts to cartel style street assassination.

This thread is refreshing. The healthcare system needs to be completely reworked but killing executives isn’t gonna do it. They’ll replace him, set up security services, and change absolutely zero features of their business.

And now security services