Remember remember!
The 4th of December
A CEO dies all alone;
On the street he was lain,
cold, pale and in pain,
thousands of deaths that he own.
The decisions he’d struck,
Layers removed from the slaughter,
Were a shareholders treat,
Your dead mother or daughter.
Those investors all wait, on that cold winter morn,
Still unaware of profit potential they’d mourn,
Poking at hotel breakfast, bored looks on their face
As Brian’s when he denied and delayed at great pace
Endless growth, deposed, on behalf of us all
Luigi didn’t do it, we were hiking in Nepal.
This is SO good.
Thanks :)
Eugene V. Debs will always be my favorite imprisoned candidate. Respectable vote count too, given their situation.
Why would the 1% be nervous?
It’s not like the Americans will actually do anything. At most there will be some light trolling, some graffiti and maybe a twitter hashtag. Tjen everyone will pat themselves on the back and feel slightly superior before returning to their slave jobs, without healthcare
Are you familiar with the term Stochastic Terrorism? The upshot is that enough public support may encourage individuals to take action against high-profile targets.
Imagine, for a secone, that you’re one of those 1%. According to the census, there are about 340 million people in the US. If just 50% of them hate you, that’s 170 million. If 99.9% of them do nothing, that still leaves 170 thousand willing to act. Statistically, you’d have one potential killer every two thousand people. Sure, the actual figure might be much lower. Do you know for sure? How would you estimate that?
Let’s run with that statistic for now. How many people do you interact with or pass by daily? Weekly? Monthly? How many of those potential 170k might intentionally seek you out? The more wealthy or prominent you are, the greater of a target you become, but it may also depend on personal wrongs, leaving a lot of uncertainty and hard to predict variables. How would you know whether there’s a target on your back? Or multiple?
If you thought you were invincible, that deterrence by law enforcement and public distaste for violence would prevent any such events, that illusion has been shattered now. All it takes is one slip-up of security, one person with nothing to lose and the right luck.
Would you feel safe?
Until recently, we all thought nothing would happen. Now something has happened. I think at this point it’s impossible to predict whether that will inspire copycats, whether the public approval may encourage more disruptice mass action or whether it will actually go back to complacency and stay an isolated incident. That unpredictability should give them pause.
Add to that if you suffered at their hands.
Add to that if you just, by chance, find an opportunity to fuck them up.
They will end up hiding in their gated communities of course.
I remember posts like yours from a while back… and then one day a young man with a bright future and as lot of advantage chose to leave that behind to shoot a CEO in the back of the head on the open street in broad daylight.
“Why would the 1% be nervous”
Your post is a weak attempt to sow defeat in the hearts and minds of those who started to perk up and think a bit more after seeing what Luigi decided needed to be done. On balance, your post reads like you’re actually nervous.
I mean, the internet does nothing better than slacktivism.
Sure, but rumors have it there are people that go out and actually touches grass between their slacktivism sessions.
It really helps that increasingly the internet just feels shittier and shittier so people actually WANT to “touch grass”.
I mean, “nobody wants to work anymore!”… Maybe you’re just repeating buzzwords because the blind repetition is comforting enough to help you feel sure about an unsure world? Maybe you’ve long since stopped questioning the meaning of these catchphrases and their perceived validity before you plainly parrot them, as designed.
How about people actually do shit, take action in real live, and then they supplement that with additional online activism. I’m out marching, I’m picketing, I’m supporting unions, I’m researching candidates and their funding and I’m voting. I’m educating younger people who are curious and welcoming back misled friends and family when they wake to the tactics of conservatives and realize they need to stop refraining or voting against their best interest.
Technically wasn’t broad daylight, it was just before sunrise. But that doesn’t really affect your point.
Wow, the CEOs really do wake up early and work hard /s
Hitler wore a brown hat
what a shithead
I’ll be honest. I’m not sure. I grew up outside the US. Things were far worse but in some ways, less bad division wise. I was mostly a child or a teen but I did live thru two revolutions. Both regime changing.
It all starts rather complacent and lazy. But the bubbles. They are not feeling new to me.
They don’t see us as human and are just finding out the feeling is mutual.
FAFO
Whenever he gets cheers and applause in a news comedy show, the host always looks uncomfortable. You can almost see the leash of their corporate overlords being tugged.
I mean, it’s not just that. it’s legal liability. part of the reason they charged him with terrorism is to tie any show of support to a crime as well. supporting him is like supporting al-qaeda now. so I ask you, DO YOU CONDEMN HUMMUS? DO YOU CONDOM MORDOR OF CEOS?
Yes, I do condom mordor of ceos
OH SO YOU SUPPORT HUMMUS THE SILENCE SPEAKS VOLUMES
But how do you feel about hummus?
All it did was show a lot of people what bullshit a charge of “terrorism” is.
For the longest time, people thought “terrorism” meant “very evil,” so now that someone who isn’t evil is being labeled a terrorist, they are upset.
In reality, if you try to change politics with violence against a civilian, you are a terrorist.
“One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.”
Yeah, this country was founded by terrorists.
I think they’d technically be classified as insurgents/rebels because they mostly/exclusively fired upon the military as far as I know.
as far as I know.
Well, it’s time to brush up a bit before commenting, then, huh?
Do you thoroughly recheck every topic before you make a comment? Must be exhausting.
That or you’re a hypocrite. Up to you.
That’s not what the law in NY actually says. It’s not merely that you’re trying to change government policy through violence. It’s that you’re trying to do it through intimidating government employees. The prosecutor screwed the pooch on this one. Luigi didn’t actually meet the terrorism modifier requirements in NY. At least that’s what I got from Legal Eagle.
As a side note, legal eagle is available on nebula.tv with no ads. I think the first episode is free, and then the service is $36/year, with more of that going to who you watch.
Yup! I’ve long been a Nebula subscriber.
Interesting. I thought his terrorism charges were the federal ones?
Either way this will be a hell of a case.
No he got NY terrorism charges and murder charges in NY and federally and then federal gun charges iirc
Hopefully it’s hard to prove that his intent was change and not revenge
You don’t engrave a message on casings unless you’re sending a message to the living.
That’s an incredibly flimsy argument. People have been writing messages on ammo since ammo existed. There’s not even an established pattern of terrorists writing on ammo - they’re more likely to claim credit for an attack after the fact and include their message there.
Those were words for him. Deny and defend this, mother fucker.
You assert my argument is flimsy, yet your argument is that someone is going to be able to read the casings popping out of a guy’s gun shooting at him from behind?
Lol. Lmao, even.
The company’s other employees are, at time of writing, still living, so sending a message to the living doesn’t mean it’s not solely revenge.
I’m still like 100% sure that this isn’t the same guy in the pictures taken on the crime scene, given that literally ALL THEY HAVE TO GO BY is that his form of dress was the same.
School shooters should be getting hit with terrorism charges
It certainly causes more terror, but mostly just with the rabble, not the ultra wealthy who actually matter.
It is perfectly legal to advocate for illegal activity. The first amendment has broad protections for this. SCOTUS has ruled on this even recently. You need to be able to advocate for illegal activity if you want people to have any chance to change the law.
It is perfectly legal to come right out on national television and say, “Luigi did nothing wrong. The president and governor should pardon him, and the mayor of NYC should throw him a parade.”
lol… those who remember the 2000s know that’s all out the window if the government says anything is terrorism.
The right to free speech and the right to peaceably assemble hasn’t been respected at any point during US history.
Not immediately after the country was formed when they signed the sedition act into law.
Not while people were protesting for abolitionism.
Not while people were protesting for women’s suffrage.
Not while people held demonstrations while on strike.
Not during the cold war and red scare.
Not during the civil rights movement.
Not during the George Floyd protests.
They’re not going to start now.
Like the incoming Christo Gestapo crew will give a shit about that when they start rounding up potential “wrong thinkers”
Also, lets not forget who will be president soon… Trump and his fellows have hinted at going after fake news media before. Going after terrorism supporting fake news media is even easier.
Also GOP: “We are all domestic terrorists”
For those who have forgotten, this is an actual quote from the republican party.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cpac-banner-domestic-terrorists/
The venn diagram of Lemmy users and people who aren’t aware of that image are a circle here on earth and another circle in low orbit of Sedna.
Holy shit America is becoming united under the banner bof domestic terrorism. I wholeheartedly approve. If the ruling class isn’t pissing themselves we haven’t gone far enough yet. They should fear We the people.
Wait, “condom” and “mordor”??!? What the hell sub is this??!!
Didn’t Hillary Clinton stated in one of those leaked mails that AQ was with the US or something?
Ugh Senator Foghorn Kennedy is a fucking embarrassment to the English speaking population.
Ok then, sure, make the average person a terrorist. That will be fun!
Not all “news comedy”, FWIW — though I think you were referring to Faux “News”, Twatter, FB, MSNBC, et al.
That’s not the expression in those moments. Take another, longer look.
It’s also just the purview of the liberal elite. So rich and far removed from society they think murdering someone makes you evil and there’s never any reason to do it.
Meanwhile our media is absolutely jam packed with freedom fighters and underdogs and man against the system… ultra gore.
So like idk what message the elites have been getting out of the media but the really popular stuff is always the stuff that speaks to the masses… and feels relatable.
So sitcoms and… horror dystopia, yep.
They obviously don’t have a problem with murder (they have a murder problem!) unless it’s one of them receiving the murdering
I’m not saying he’d get my vote, but I’m not not saying it.
Question would be who are the Democrats running?
Liz Cheney
They’re going to attempt to appeal even more to conservatives by running a previous candidate for the Democratic nomination.
David Duke.
… this doesn’t even feel like satire…
I think next time they’re just going to go for animatronics attached to some soggy bread.
No, they’ll run Nancy Pelosi’s mummified cervix.
Joe Biden
The fact that his administration was one of the most progressive/productive in history overall says a lot about this country.
Oh well. T-minus 30ish days until the death cult starts using prison slave labor to put brawndo on all the crops to own da libz!
It does say a lot when this country’s most progressive administration also couldn’t help itself but shovel money and weapons in full support of the most live-publicized genocide in the world.
Yes, no justification for Biden’s position in Israel. He was fucked either way politically, by design, but from a human perspective, his age was showing there especially. It felt very clear that he was/is not paying attention to the evolving reality of today in Israel. He likely couldn’t comprehend it and in his mind just defaulted to his comfortable 1994 perception of Israel.
Again though, I’m talking about overall work of the administration. His presidency would get many categorical A+ historically, but his Israel response and blind support would be a D- at best, if one considered some of the rhetoric (though not actually supported by action ultimately).
And of course, always worth mentioning, that the alternative is US pouring gasoline on this conflict and arming Israel with flamethrowers and gas masks to avoid indoctrinated foot soldiers being slowed down by the overwhelming smell of blackened, blistered flesh and incinerated hair. Here it comes.
The fact that his administration was one of the most progressive/productive in history overall
I mean, people underrate how progressive he is and how he handled the presidency, but that’s going a bit far. FDR, Truman, etc
I’d give him “one of” if he’s in the top 5.
Jill Biden
J’Biden
Absolutely. They will do anything to not break the chain
DMC just watched one old ass geezer who lost their first reelection go on to win…so Dems are eying Jimmy Carter
Nah, put him on the Supreme Court and lend it some fucking legitimacy.
I suppose what’s another criminal on the Supreme Court? Maybe he can run his own murder trial and find no wrong doing.
Do they do anything else?
He’s only 26, which means the 2036 election suddenly gets more interesting.
trump promised he will “fix the elections”, so no more voting will be needed.
If that happens there will be a whole lot of voting by bullet
There won’t. This is copium.
That’s assuming they don’t make the death-penalty terrorism charge stick… which they will in a heartbeat.
Have you heard of this one neat trick (jury nullification) that lawyers hate?
I haven’t heard about it at all. Not a once. I would never talk about it during a jury selection process either.
I don’t see them letting it come to that. They’ll pick jury members of which they are 100% sure they won’t do jury nullification.
Remember, the whole system is behind getting him charged.
Well the whole system only gets to pick half the jury
Do you really think there’s no way for the combined power of the state & capital to influence jury selection? That feels like a very naive take.
The defense has the right to pick half the jury - and defense lawyers are usually very serious about defending their clients and getting the best possible outcome. They’re going to pick the most favorable jurists they can.
IMO he got over charged and they state is gonna learn the hard way that their strategy of making an example of him will backfire.
Please see my reply to the other comment - you’re assuming the pool of jurors contains enough people that would consider nullification. As far as I’m aware, the defense has no influence on this pool itself. So how do you know that the jurors the defense can choose from are actually randomly selected?
It’s pretty much a given that the state knows your opinion on jury nullification if you’ve ever publicly posted about it. Hell, based on the Snowden leaks there’s a good chance they know it if you’ve ever mentioned it over e.g. the telephone. How can you be sure that this knowledge isn’t used to bias the jury pool?
It sounds like you don’t understand how jury selection works.
No, I think I understand it well enough to also understand that the system isn’t perfect.
For example, the same system that is trying to get him charged is also responsible for producing the jury pool. Coincidentally, the same system regularly buys data about its citizens from big tech companies, like social media. The same social media on which plenty of people publicly commented on the case.
Unless the defense is literally involved in every step of the process (starting from voter registration), there’s no way to be sure that the jury pool is actually unbiased.
Now, hopefully I’m wrong about this, and you can show me specifically how we can be absolutely sure that the jury pool is completely unbiased. But I don’t think that you’ll be able to do so without implicitly relying on the same system that is being defended against.
I’m sure defense lawyers love it. Cops and cop lawyers sure hate it though.
The minions of the wealthy hate anything that impedes them from executing the will of their masters.
That not a disqualifier though
Being dead might make it challenging…
Being brain dead doesn’t seem to be an hindrance.
Nah, death row inmates can live for decades
True, but more inmates were executed during Trump’s last term than are currently on death row.
Well, considering there are only three on death row right now, that doesn’t sound too bad.
oh no oh fuck
He’s got enough money to drag that out for years like everyone else does
The problem is that the guy would be a third party candidate, which means he would get treated as a sinkhole for the voters of the opposite party. This would work specially well for the GQP since they could just have a candidate adopt his ideology, throw a lot of money into news, media, and rallies to trump up support, and then easily turn around and just not fulfill it when they win. Meanwhile, there will be plenty of people in the other side of the flawed bipartisan system who will just blame democrats for not choosing their third party candidate regardless of the actual consequences voting third party has in USA’s democratic facade of a system.
Just pointing out if an insurance office shuts down for the day then no claims are getting approved.
Well my darling deario no claims are being approved, they’re being rejected though.
Two weeks ago people were posting stats on the front page showing the industry average denied claims is around 16% and UnitedHealth denies double that at 32%, so that means the vast majority of claims are approved even for the worst examples.
I’m sure we’d be pretty sanguine about a school bus driver who gets 68% of the kids to school safely, too.
If the options were a bus with 32% fatality and no bus with 100% fatality, would you advocate we tear down the bus?
And we only have those two choices because of capitalist gaslighting. Given those two options, I would advocate deposing a few more insurance executives to improve the situation.
Alright, clearly you’re lost.
This is a post about making threats of death and violence to people who work in an office building handling insurance claims, getting it to shut down for the day.
I don’t think swingingthelamp is lost.
I think they just hit you with the polite version of the “coconut island” cohesive nature of capital.
I think capitalist realism is what makes many of us choose the lesser evil of 68% mortality.
68% in particular is stretching the term “vast majority” especially when that 32% is people who pay for insurance every fucking month for the explicit purpose of being covered.
They aren’t asking for a handout. They are entitled to this coverage. They paid for it already!
This, I’m tired of the 1% saying we “Just want free stuff”, like we’re demanding Xboxes and snazzy T-Shirts with pictures of [Insert Profitable Brand Here]
We’re asking for the systems we actively maintain (often against our will and under threat of homelessness, starvation, and death I remind you) to do anything for us.
We’re asking for the systems we actively maintain (often against our will and under threat of homelessness, starvation, and death I remind you) to do anything for us.
WHAT? But the profits!
I wish it were only the 1% saying bullshit like that, but sadly it seems the majority of voters are sold on the idea.
Yes, but once they realize that THEY themselves are the Welfare Queens that the GOP they will wake the fuck up…
I’m kidding, I’ve ran into several “The Government needs to keep its hands off my Medicare!” and “Where was Uncle Sam when I was on Food Stamps!?!”
And they never take “The Government runs Medicare. This is like asking McDonalds to get their hands off of your Big Mac.” and “He was the gentleman giving you the food stamps” for valid answers.
I’m kidding, I’ve ran into several “The Government needs to keep its hands off my Medicare!” and “Where was Uncle Sam when I was on Food Stamps!?!”
Relevant video example of your second quote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTwpBLzxe4U
It’s been 14 years, I don’t think they’re going to wake up unless we go door to door explaining how the GOP has been voting and the projected results of the legislatures.
Example: “The government spends more on medical because of privatized care than if they simply distributed funds directly. Insurance companies pay all of their employees and CEOs on profits taken from people, a government program would have no profits to speak of. The government is distributing funds to these companies on the poor’s behalf, more funds than would just cover the care if we changed to a Single Payer system. This could actually lower your taxes if it went through, but it takes 60 senate votes and for over a decade one of the two major parties always votes against it in unison.”
Right right right, but that’s more than zero. That’s tens of millions more cases than zero. We need to understand every action, or inaction, will have consequences to make the best possible decisions. Some users are advocating armed violence against the offices that would be allocating funding for healthcare, not even the CEOs but the actual workers at the company, it is each of our responsibilities to weigh the pros and cons and examine all of our options to solve these problems.
Theres no easy way. It’s not as simple as pushing a button or pulling a trigger.
Oh come the fuck on you can’t seriously be going “I’m just saying it’s not zero!“ and acting like this is the discussion at hand.
Ideally it should be 0% (this is too optomistic, but I am not one make that figure) people pay into an insurance system to distribute risk. If a company cant resolve the inflow/outflow problem (not even going to get into profits, for-profit insurance is unethical) then it needs to be managed by an organization that can. ~30 governments (USA not amongst them) that have solved this problem for their citizens and anyone requiring medical assistance within their borders.
Right right right all cool, but I was conversing with that other user who claimed nothing was getting approved.
Bro 1 in 3 claims being denied is fuckin insane are you drunk on boot
Drunk on boot
Love that
Especially when you consider that these claims are not being made by random people but by trained board certified physicians whose entire livelihood depends on them providing prompt and appropriate care for their patients.
I feel like even 16% being rejected is very high
Well, the claims are reviewed by physicians but they’re often not in the specialization of the care provided so they can make mistaken judgements and a great way to appeal it is to ask the insurance company for proof that the physician who denied the claim does specialize in the type of care being reviewed.
Unfortunately most people don’t know that, less than 1% of denied claims are appealed.
1 in 3 is bad
3 in 3 is worse
What is this comment supposed to bring to the discussion? Edit: bro is like im going to win this debate by having a very narrow defensible argument that 1 is smaller than 3
This is an incredibly stupid hill to die on
If you presume the other health funds are acting rationally, accepting legitimate claims, rejecting those that are not covered by the policy of the person claiming them, then for every illegitimate claim denied by the average fund United deny one illegitimate and one valid claim.
In what way is that not terrible?
I’m not sure who you’re arguing against but it isn’t me.
I’m not defending anything. I’m just pointing out an obvious lie.
Why do you think none of the claims being accepted is not terrible but 84% being accepted is terrible? Are you pro-debt and unnecessary death and sickness?
100 minus 36 is 64, not 84.
I never suggested all should be accepted. I made an assumption for my argument that the average health funds are acting fairly. I don’t believe that, incidentally, since many are far below the average and I don’t believe they are approving invalid claims
Two weeks ago people were posting stats on the front page showing the industry average denied claims is around 16% and UnitedHealth denies double that at 32%, so that means the vast majority of claims are approved even for the worst examples.
Two weeks ago people were posting stats on the front page showing the industry average denied claims is around 16%
industry average denied claims is around 16%
16%
Right. My comment, which you were replying to was about the worst company.
So basically you’re saying nothing changes if they shut down.
Paper pushers set up a toll booth.
It’s more like a hydraulic bridge, really.
Put him in charge of healthcare maybe, but electing libertarians to office is a big chunk of why you have this problem in the first place. Guy has only had one good idea.
Imo Chase Oliver would have been a pretty cool president. He may have been a Libertarian but he openly called for Israel to end the genocide (yes he called it what it is), called for an end to all buisnesses subsidies, proposed a complete tax code overhaul designed to eliminate loopholes, and heavily limit patents which would destroy many pharmaceuticals.
When the Venn diagram of YA doomsday fiction and reality overlap more than you thought.
I mean, MrBeast is going full Torment Nexus.
I’m too old to know the four notes from the Hunger Games, so I substitute my own: 🎼 you ♩ must ♩ use ♩ the ♩ force ♩
Shit, that was five notes.
Use force you must?
Isn’t that just the police motto?
Nah, you gotta take a drink every time he says “Roxanne.”
It’s all about the tones…
I read the books, so I wish I knew the notes.
If they aren’t doing anything immoral they have nothing to be nervous about.
What’s the hunger games 4 notes reference here?
It was the tune sung by the mockingjay bird, iirc it was the symbol of the resistance.
G B♭ A D
The four notes whistled by Katniss. Became a central melody in the series.
