• Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 days ago

      Apparently they did start approving more right after it. And now they are getting sued by blackrock, a majority shareholder, for hurting profits. As much as I dislike these CEOs, the system breeds them to be this way. And there will always be more to take thier place. But holding them accountable will also mean that doing the right thing becomes good for the shareholders.

      • thanks AV@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 days ago

        Alls I’m saying is you’d probably save more money paying out claims over hiring full time security for 40 different executives who cant help but deny claims

        Its that thing, you know? You caused a problem and instead of fixing that problem you fix the next problem.

        The issue is for profit healthcare. Instead of making the choice which would remove the executives from the crosshair, they decide adding bodies between us and them is the best option. Id assume those people care about their lives not ending, and the cheapest way to do that is to provide coverage to the people paying for it. $3000/hr is not just a throwaway expense, and that was a rough estimate erring on the extremely low end of private security.

        I was simply spelling out how much they’re willing to pay just for the privilege of denying healthcare to Americans. That’s your money (hypothetically.) They would rather spend that money on defense forces than do their fucking jobs. I understand they are being sued by blackrock, but blackrock isn’t the one creating a need for private security. Interesting choice is all I can say.

        • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 days ago

          I think you underestimate how much the “save” from denying claims the way they do. Thier net income is about $2.25 million per hour. I don’t know where the $3000/hour came from, but that is a drop in the ocean to them

          • thanks AV@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 days ago

            where the $3000/hour figure came from

            I just pulled a number out of my ass lol reality is that they’re spending significantly more for this security, I just wanted to give an example of what it costs to have one security guard getting paid $75/hr (guesstimate hourly rate for mid level security) for each of these 40 executives.

            Scale that as far as you want $3000/hr is just the bare minimum for something like this

            I dont disagree with your point though. They could pay to send a monkey into the sun. Its not a matter of what they can afford; it’s about sending a message.

        • AnarchistArtificer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 days ago

          When you get to silly levels of wealth, it’s less about the money and more about power. You’re right that £3000/hr is an absurd amount to spend, and that suggests that they value the power they have within this inhumane system more than the monetary cost of private security.

          • thanks AV@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 days ago

            Exactly, its more a flex than even an actual security measure. They’re making it clear: your life is worth less than this. “We will spend more than you make in a year to keep our executives safe from people, like you, who are sacrificed to keep us rich”

  • sturger@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    7 days ago

    So how many of the execs said, “This job isn’t worth risking my life for” and quit? How many of them said, “Maybe we should examine how we do business and change.”? How many of them said, “My God. We’re killing people. I’m out.”?

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      7 days ago

      Nah if literally murdering people for profit didn’t stop them then really nothing will. These people are sociopaths that only see the career ladder.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Exec: Hey Claude, are we killing people?

      ClaudeAI: Yes.

      Exec: Are you sure? I think were doing great things for them, i don’t see it as killing

      ClaudeAI: Of course you aren’t, you’re doing great things!

  • Deflated0ne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    7 days ago

    Good. They should live in constant fear.

    Industrialized social murder should be a dangerous profession.

  • Bouzou@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    6 days ago

    They systematically made millions of people fear for their lives. I’m glad shared that for a moment.

  • skisnow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    They’ll do anything to save themselves except for stop being evil.

    Sometimes I wonder if those second-tier execs are even more culpable than the CEOs. Like, we expect CEOs to be psychopaths. But those second-tier guys that got a seat further down the table, off the back of a good degree and a few decades of hard work? They know what they’re doing is wrong but choose to go along with it anyway because they’re just following orders.