You do not have an internal moral system that would allow you to understand the answer.
You don’t even have an answer, so I guess we’ll never know if that’s true or not.
Will it be as effective as killing Brian Thompson has been?
'Cause, ya know, given that nothing substantial has changed in the private insurance industry and the Republicans are about to gut Medicaid I’m not seeing what Mangione did to ACTUALLY FUCKING CHANGE ANYTHING.
Then you haven’t been paying attention.
The rich weren’t scared of us before. Now they are. That’s a good thing.
Bwahahahahahaha! You sweet summer child…
So now I’m hopelessly naive and an amoral psychopath?
BTW,
According to the original policy statement, Anthem had said it would pay only for anesthesia treatments for the length of time that a procedure or surgery is estimated to require based on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service’s physician work time values. The insurer noted that claims for anesthesia “above the established number of minutes will be denied.”
Yippee! Of course I’m not seeing there that they got rid of the obscene estimated work time values limit for surgeries that shouldn’t be there in the first place.
A policy which was announced on 12/1 and rescinded on 12/6. What happened in between those two days?
It’s great that the anesthesia needed for surgeries overtime is covered . . . but is the fucking surgery?
It’s useful to keeping mind that the reason we are taught that “violence is always wrong” is because it means that when we are out of legal options, we are utterly helpless and can be safely ignored or killed. And that in practice the only violence that is “always wrong” is punching up; attacking doctors who perform abortions, killing gays, lynching black people and so on is acceptable because those are people the Right thinks deserve to die.
And it’s the Right that gets to set the rules of official morality.
But that’s just back to “Violence is OK if the government says so”.
And corporate CEOs kill people in numbers on the level of the Holocaust; the difference is that it never stops. Seven million people a year die from tobacco alone. Far, far more people have died to corporations than to Nazi Germany.
And? Do you want to live in the “Violence is OK if I say so” reality?
We don’t get to choose the reality we live in.
And the reality we live in is one where the purpose of the courts is to protect rich people from the consequences of their actions and human sacrifice is an acceptable and even encouraged way to Make Line Go Up.
But the courts will save us from Trump . . . or are you walking that back now?
BTW this is the answer you should go with,
Comparing civil suits against government officials to criminal law is like comparing Luigi Mangione to Tim McVeigh.
But this thread isn’t about Trump.
We do; except that since the right wing is the only side that believes that they can use violence they can do so with impunity. While the alleged defenders of the bigots and the powerful have no answer except “It would be wrong to fight back! You’ll die with the moral upper hand, though!”
Great. Now I’m in agreement with Der_Trihs. We’ve gone off the rails.
Collectively, the US democratically chose its system of provision of healthcare. It had a chance to have a less dog-eat-dog system and categorically and democratically rejected it.
The way US health insurers behave is an emergent property of the system. It is naïve to think that individual CEO behaviour (or even individual insurer behaviour) is the root of the problem. It’s appointing foxes to run the henhouse then shooting one every now and again when one does the obvious. It feels good but the hens keep going missing, and always will.
Shooting CEO’s isn’t a solution it’s a distraction. It’s an opiate to the masses who are easily distracted by personifications of the problem, distracting them from the underlying issue which is the fundamental structure of health care financing in the US.
Not really? The Democrats every time the issue comes up ignore their own base in yet another futile attempt to pander to the Republicans. It’s not very democratic and definitely not “categorical”; the people who disagree with the present system just aren’t allowed a say in the decisions, that’s all.
People are represented according to how rich they are, how white they are, how “Christian” they are, how male they are, and how right wing they are; not according to how many of them there are.
Piffle. The Dems tried to implement Obamacare, which got watered down and watered down because of the need to compromise due to the US consistently voting for and giving Republicans power. The Dems didn’t “pander to the Republicans” for giggles or due to being inherently submissive. That’s just you trying to find some way not to face up to the uncomfortable but blindingly obvious truth - the US has got what it as persistently voted for (in the aggregate).
Republicans didn’t make Joe Lieberman kill the public option.