• MagicShel@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    Problem is it wasn’t illegal. So the law is no use here. So exposing the activities they are engaged in right in public is no use. It’s like whistleblowing on Trump colliding with Russia. He did it right in front of everybody and got away with it.

    Also, ultimately profits don’t have to always increase. In fact, it’s an impossibility over the long term without diversifying, and even then growth will slow. There’s not a damn thing wrong with a business that consistently, reliably turns 1B into 1.1B (or whatever).

    killing a CEO is very likely to result in either imprisonment and/or death and unlikely to directly cause change. It’ll spark some discussion on the news, but is that really worth throwing your life away?

    Maybe? I mean a life lived in misery isn’t worth much. At the end of the day, only he can answer whether it was worth the cost, but the rest of us have the opportunity to build on the message he sent. Will we capitalize (lol) on that opportunity? Probably not, but Mangione was undoubtedly a spark. Eventually a spark will catch, but of course it’s never certain who will get burned.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      exposing the activities they are engaged in right in public is no use

      It would piss people off without pushing them to defend someone you murdered. In other words, the message is clearer.

      He did it right in front of everybody and got away with it.

      We don’t have receipts, so it doesn’t hit as hard. Catching someone red handed doing what everyone already assumes they’re doing is a much better call to action than just saying what we’re all thinking.

      ultimately profits don’t have to always increase

      They do if you want to keep your job as CEO, otherwise they’ll replace you with someone who will chase profits.

      • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        They do if you want to keep your job as CEO, otherwise they’ll replace you with someone who will chase profits.

        I’m so unenamoured with unfettered capitalism these days. This shit is unsustainable.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 days ago

          Afaict, the problem here isn’t capitalism, but protectionism.

          Laws limit how insurance companies can make money, so they use the tools they have access to. Likewise, we’ve prioritized employer sponsored insurance over customer selected insurance (government insurance is a separate beast), so insurance companies only need to impress HR, not end customers, and HR likes bullet points and lower costs, and don’t care about fine print. It’s the same reason why my employer sponsored 401k is more expensive than my IRA, despite offering fewer features.

          When you manipulate the market like this, this is what we get. Insurance is already pretty anti-consumer, and we’ve eliminated most of the little accountability insurance companies have to end customers. That’s not how capitalism should work, and the solution is to either let capitalism work (remove insurance decisions from employers, let customers change, just like auto or home insurance), or to decide that insurance should be publicly funded. The current system is the worst of both worlds (government meddling and capitalist profit maximization).

          Neither is solved by killing one of the players, that just makes the player a victim.