next time I hear “there is just too many (brown) people” i swear
You must log in or # to comment.
Yeah, kinda like that time Brian Thompson got shot, and the next day United Healthcare ceased to exist.
Not saying that the general point of corporations doing more harm than people is wrong. Just that if you think that the corporation is just one person, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
if that continues to happen, trust me, eventually none of these fuckers will be left in line.
deleted by creator
United Healthcare’s stock is down 60% since the incident. United Healthcares board and new CEOs lowered the rejection rate of patients out of fear as well. Say what you want about the morality of what was done. The efficacy speaks for itself
The stock drop would be expected, but is there any credible source that denial rate dropped?
Yup. After 9/11 for a while it seemed every week or two the news would report that “The leader of Al Qaeda” had just been killed or captured. Not a false statement, yet it happened again the next week.
Maybe we should assign these fuckers playing cards like Bush did 👀
Kemp is alive and governing Georgia as far as I know but I’m happy to be corrected if that’s wrong. You may be thinking of Brian Thompson who involuntarily resigned his position as the CEO of UnitedHealthcare on a NYC sidewalk.
Ah damn, you right. Should have Googled it. Too many Brian’s in the news, lol. Got the wires crossed.
Editing to fix.
You did have my hopes up for a moment.
… So kill the entire board.
That’d probably make a more uh, substantial material impact on their bottom line.
Oh, they keep doing evil shit with a new board?
… repeat.
Or, I guess you can just either … well, either try to run away and hide, pray to the normalcy bias gods that one of these days the legal systems they own will do something against them, or just resign yourself to a kind of smug, self defeating moral solace in being doomed, but being right while being doomed.
Maybe find an economic system not dependant on exploitation? There’s gotta be one out there somewhere
Sure would be cool if anyone had any realistic plans for achieving such a thing.
There is also a societal dependance on some of the status quo. The bigger issue is how hard they actively resist the change. A lot of places still rely on trucking at a minimum to fill the groccery store with food wrapped in plastic, most of which is powered or made by fossil fuels. We need to electrify and diversifying but they cling to oil and have way too much power in governmental decisions to prevent or reverse any reduction in dependance for their products.
the post is about who is doing it, who is responsible,
it’s supposed to make the problem less abstract
Operant conditioning, also called instrumental conditioning, is a learning process in which voluntary behaviors are modified by association with the addition (or removal) of reward or aversive stimuli. The frequency or duration of the behavior may increase through reinforcement or decrease through punishment or extinction.
Within a week of the killing, BCBS backed out on some of their upcoming bullshit and United Heathcare’s pre-authorization rejection rate has decreased dramatically in the aftermath.
Thimpson’s death (at the hands of someone whose identity we’ll never know for sure) was objectively good for the insured.
I honestly have to wonder at what point people will collectively say “why the hell are we letting them do this” ? Not sure what happens after that, but it seems like it must have to happen at some point, right? Right?
Because the people in positions to do something about it get paid by the evil doers to make sure business is as usual
Because the average American and European feels their convenient lifestyle is more important than the life of the planet. They’ll talk the talk about the environment, but they won’t walk the wall with their votes or actions.
I was recently at a kind of convention on the topic of “how to build a sustainable society”. There were two ~40 yr old ladies in the row in front of me.
One got out this super shiny copper flask. The lady next to her was like “oh that looks nice!” and they start talking about it. The lady that got it out said something about copper, its health impacts blabla and how she got it last week from Amazon.
And I’m just sitting there, holding it together, almost laughing out of frustration, about this whole situation.
Like, maybe she did actually need a bottle to hydrate herself outside, but…
Please do not put Europeans in the same pot with US Americans. These days are altogether over but for the topic of fighting climate change things were different for quite a while.
You are. Don’t pretend you aren’t, on climate issues. You’re doing more than the usa, yes, but no where even close to enough.
If so then we are all in the same pot. Who is doing enough or more than that?
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/mapped-renewable-energy-by-country-in-2022/
I would say anyone who is above 70% renewables is potentially on track. But you need to take heating and cars into consideration for usage, as well as the carbon impacts of imports and various industries… So really,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita
Including this information, maybe some random small African nations.
Exactly.
The problem its not just some rich guys they are just the hitmen. Its PetroStates that are behind them. Its not about money at this point its about power and a house of cards those states put in place completely propped up by oil. As in if they stop oil their Nation collapses and they dragged from into the streets and eliminated.
I said nothing of the sort. But I ask once again: If we execute these 90 people, will that make us stop burning oil? Is it at least a helpful step down the path of stopping to burn oil?
If not, then please just don’t act as though these 90 people are all we have to overcome to save the planet.
Of course something will happen. If the bosses or big corporations would be killed constantly, the next in line would be thinking about changing things. Just remember Luigi.
https://factually.co/fact-checks/health/luigi-mangione-healthcare-accessibility-impact-288343
It costs 7.5% of GDP to halt climate change.
But each 12.5% of GDP is lost per +1°C
The problem is that the people who need to pay are not the people who will be most affected.
IMO killing them is the only way to have any real change. It’s the very first step in any plan. We must get rid of the existing filth, before we can build anything new.
No, it’s not the only step, but it’s the biggest and most difficult and most impactful.
As the saying goes “you can’t polish a turd”.
Billionaires are turds.
Still wrong, it’s capitalism. Without them, there would be different people in the same position. Hate the game, not the player. Well, hate the game and the player but don’t expect change from exchanging the player
What’s your best, longest-lived example of a society without capitalism? Do you have any?
By capitalism, I mean
“private individuals or companies that own and control businesses and property”, the simplest definition of capitalism
Capitalism was literally invented in the last few hundred years.
Sure, but before that was feudalism, or similar systems where the state owned the means of production with no competition besides foreign powers and sometimes the church. Capitalism doesn’t give much power to workers, but it’s definitely more than serfdom.
“private individuals or companies that own and control businesses and property”, the simplest definition of capitalism
Bad definition of Capitalism. This existed in Feudal states. Simple definitions are rarely the ones to use.
Then provide your preferred definition of capitalism and answer?
Using your preferred definition of capitalism, what is the best, longest-lived example of a society without capitalism?
This is an honest question… I can’t think of any nation that has existed without it, so I asked.
any socialist society will be inherently disadvantaged by the fact that the global hegemon, the USA, is hellbent on destroying them. so, given that, maybe the soviet union? china? they certainly aren’t perfect, soviet union especially, but any future socialist project can (and should) learn from their successes and mistakes
You have mercantilism and other forms of private business without capitalism. A yeoman making something and selling it isn’t capitalism.
Your definition is intentionally bad because you do in fact have to separate capitalism from just the very generic concept of private enterprise.
“private individuals or companies that own and control businesses and property”, the simplest definition of capitalism
That’s not the simplest definition because it’s not the definition of capitalism at all. You can have property ownership without capitalism.
By that definition, Roman Empire? Which lasted pretty damn long, by similar methods. Imperialism. A government that has at least a veneer of responsibility to the populace.
I mean there’s big differences, but more similarities imo.
No one ever does.
We need regulated capitalism. I don’t mind working for money. Most lemmys would like to smoke weed all day and not do shit. World dont work like that kids.
Capitalism with regulation and taxation of billionaires. Welfare state for the sick and elderly. Why is this so hard? We don’t need communism.
Okay how do you stop the capitalist who run our government and all of our economic production from getting rid of that welfare once their profits dry up? They own the military and all of its assets btw.
The treats they gave us have been a concession from the start. They were given because we put up enough of a fight that the capitalists worried not giving them to us would be worse. They will take them away if we don’t keep that fight, and its implicit threat, going. I don’t want all of our future generations for the rest of time to have to keep up that fight.
Collective ownership is very common (no pun intended) global and throughout history
Tell me you’ve never studied history pre-1800 without telling me you’ve never studied history pre-1800.
Tell me you don’t have a clue without telling me you don’t have a clue
If you want actual examples, almost all societies before 1800 we’re not capitalist. Feudal society wasn’t capitalist, neither was Roman society. Hunter gather society by most accounts was a form of primitive communism, and that is the vast majority of human history.
Rome wasn’t capitalist?
What definition of capitalism are you using? They seemed very capitalist to me.
(I am using standard simple definition of “an economic system where private individuals or companies own and control businesses and property”)
You’re going to need a narrow definition of company for that definition to not be very broad, as Wikipedia defines company as:
A company is a legal entity representing an association of legal persons with a shared objective, such as generating profit or benefiting society.
So basically a company can be any group of people, separated from the state but still recognized by it. So is a commune a company then? If everything was controlled by communes would that be capitalist?
It’s better to use a more specific definition, again from wikipedia:
Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and its use for the purpose of obtaining profit.[1][2] This socioeconomic system has developed historically in several stages, and is defined by a number of constituent elements: private property, profit motive, capital accumulation, competitive markets, commodification, wage labor, and an emphasis on innovation and economic growth.
While all of these existed in Roman civilization, concentrated in the big cities such as Rome, the majority of the economy was slaves and peasants working the land to feed themselves while being forced to give a portion to landlords as rent and to the government as taxes, much like most agricultural civilizations. This sort of economy does not revolve around profit ie. Buying something, paying someone to improve it, and selling it for more on an open market so you can buy more and sell that and on and on… That is possible in Rome and there are capitalists, but that’s not the main mode of production in the economy so the economy isn’t capitalist. Just like there are communes in the US but the US isn’t communist.
I don’t need that narrow definition, as the definition I’m using is “…private individuals OR companies”, so no companies are required.
Are companies necessary with capitalism? Not per the definition. They CAN be a part of it.
There were TONS of “profit-motivated” Romans throughout their economy. I think that the definition you used from Wikipedia means that Rome was capitalist, as private property, profit motive, competitive markets, commodification, and wage labor were all a part of Roman civilization, and not a small part.
Centurions could own land and were paid a wage, etc. All existed under Rome.
Thanks for your answer, I am very familiar with Rome and at least I know where you’re coming from. In spite of your initial comment, I’ve read quite a bit about pre-1800s civilization. Perhaps more than you regarding Rome, as revealed by your response.
I’m pretty sure what most people are referring to here is unfettered capitalism. It’s not an on/off switch, you can have certain aspects of one thing combined with the other.
They aren’t talking about expecting change. They are talking about demanding change at gunpoint, and honestly I can’t say I’m entirely opposed.
These people are completely unaffected by the law or any other form of consequences. They have removed our capability to peacefully take action, but the less-peaceful option is always there and there are legions more of us.
Yes, the Soviet union and China ran/run on unicorn powder and butterflies. Surely capitalism and those 90 guys are the problem.
Me criticizing one thing doesn’t mean you get to pick another thing I supposedly like
No, I’m just pointing out that all economic systems we tried so far destroy the environment, it’s not specifically capitalisms fault.
For some people, history ended with the fall of the Berlin Wall which is already laughable. For you, history started with its building.
Nope, since the industrial revolution we had capitalism, communism, feudalism and a bunch of others, and they all destroyed the environment. Norilsk was a nightmare well before the wall went up. London had unbreathable air a century before that.
So history started with the industrial revolution, I see.
Environment destruction did at scale.
Say the Americans who consume 3x the energy of other developed nations.
“Jeff bezos forced me to live in the desert and run AC 10 months of the year”
“Bill Gates made me drive my car to get groceries”
“Bring back plastic straws”
“Roll coal, baby!”
To be fair on those:
- Most people can’t afford to move so if you live in the desert then you’re stuck in the desert even if the living cost would be lower somewhere else post initial moving cost, doubly so if its the only place near your job.
- No the car lobby and US city design did.
- No yeh fuck these people
- Doubly fuck these people.
On one hand, yes, sure, fuck those people, 100%. On the other hand, remember that those people are encouraged and most likely exist only because of disinformation propaganda campaigns designed, promoted and delivered by the same bus load of people. So, you know, perspective.
I like how the post is about the bus load of rich people that do the most polluting and we started blaming each other. Focus people. Our cars do pollute, but nowhere near as much as a these rich bastards.
Much more, in fact. I did the math a while ago and just plastic straws cover private jets for about a week. Moving half the US traffic from cars to public transport would do marvels for CO2 levels, more than outright banning private jets.
Exactly. People love to pretend they aren’t part of the problem as they keep their houses at 70 throughout 100° heat, roll car while driving their cars, and order boat loads of temu junk.
Lick those oil exec boots just a little harder and I’m sure they’ll send you an invite to the pedo party.
nobody said oil executives are somehow blameless or ok, it’s just funny to shift literally all blame away from you
They literally conspired to make the entire country not only dependent on their products, but did so knowing the harm those products caused to both the people and environment. The majority of the blame rests there and pretending that any amount of “personal responsibility” needs to be addressed is just so fucking stupid and self-defeating that it practically borders on sabotage. Let’s get mired in blaming each other for our own minuscule, largely involuntary contribution while they keep filling their pockets with our blood.
Our own minuscule largely involuntary contributions sum up to 20 million barrels of oil per day (in the US) 10 million per day (in the EU) and 17 million (in China).
I don’t think Musk alone is consuming that…
Let’s get mired in blaming each other for our own minuscule, largely involuntary contribution
Said the snowflake in the blizzard.
You have part of the power. If you are willing to coordinate there will be enough power to change all relevant things.
you’re right dude, the snowflake has all the agency here. not the storm that created it, nor the wind that blows it around. if only it would melt itself then the energy consumed by phase transition would cool the earth in an imperceptibly small way, bringing us that much further away from global warming catastrophe. really, it’s the snowflakes’ fault for selfishly getting frozen in the first place.
Then you are one ray of light that helped to create the pressure difference that caused the storm.
You have free will. You have the power to make change a bit bigger.
OP is pointing out that most Americans are licking oil exec boots.
Do you have a car with an internal combustion engine? Bootlicker.
If you think paper straws and electric cars are going to save the environment you’re part of the fucking problem. It’s not enough, and it was never going to be. They knew it wouldn’t be when they came up with these things which is why these are the measures that are allowed to be taken. Laws and subsidies that would actually help are instead lobbied out of viability. So we’re left with electric car subsidies making Elon Musk the richest asshole in history and paper straws making everyone hate environmentalism while we still hurtle toward annihilation.
Oil execs are rich, but they aren’t consuming 20 million barrels of oil per day by themselves.
What?
It’s a reminder that large problems are often tied to concentrated power. Holding systems accountable while still pushing for collective change is probably the most constructive path forward.
They’ll find new executives, bud. Executives are just the lackeys for shareholders and the board of directors. A new one will grow for each one lost.
Giving up hasn’t worked yet.
I’m just saying the aim isn’t the most effective. Shooting someone’s foot certainly will hamper someone, but the pain will go away eventually. Gotta aim for a more lethal part of the body
And?
Make them find new ones. And new ones after that. And after that.
Eventually that well will dry up.
Ok so not 90 people. But more like 2,000. Still a rounding error that is willfully exterminating the rest.
If only there was like a deck of cards with their faces on it.
Had a few seconds where I thought “Wired” was referring to the tech magazine and wondered what “Tired” is, who would choose name for their magazine or whatever?
Ok, but can we put AI in it somehow?
Yes I’m sure the corporations beneath these people will simply evaporate and everything will go perfectly fine.
Recycling is a con to make you feel guilty and let Chevron off the hook.
Solar energy used to be a similar con and look at it now.
How was solar a con? It produced energy, as intended. It’s gotten gradually even better at producing energy through better photovotaics, batteries, molten salt concentrated solar, and kinetic batteries (pumping water uphill during the day, running electro-hydralic power generation at night). But it was never a lie.
Plastic was never recyclable. It’s been burned in the open air in China and Indoneisa ab initio.
You can argue that glass, cardboard, and aluminum can be effectively recycled, but in the context of climate change and fossil fuels, we are taking about petroleum-based plastics. There are too many different kinds of plastic and the cost of recycling versus the cost of new material meant recycling was a chimera from the beginning.
These few people / companies destroying the planet: BLAME THE CONSUMER!
The amount of fucking everything up they do in a day is more than I do in a lifetime.
I would get banned on Reddit if I said what I wanted to say about this situation, would I get banned here too?
Depends on the instance. For example: I can say, “we should all get together and murder these people for what they have done to us” and I would likely only get banned from this community or the instance that hosts it. My home instance simply wouldn’t care
