I'm talking about the man above, who shot and killed the CEO of a health insurance company that used an AI to process health claims, leading to a 90% error rate. Many people in the United States are outraged by the healthcare industry due to the way it robs citizens and I feel the fault lies both in the hands of the greedy health insurance companies, the drug companies and the hospitals themselves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cIT-gxQFY9w

The 26 year old killer grew up in a wealthy business savvy family. He had a master's degree in comp sci, was valedictorian at his prep school and had a thirst for learning. He kept track of nearly 300 books he read or wanted to read and he exceled not only at academics but also sports. Another fun fact is he reviewed the Unibomber's manifesto 4/5 stars

He also got a job as a software engineer for a car company after graduating and had dreams of creating his own video games. He has no known drug or mental health problems. When caught by police he was shown to be very nervous and was found with a wealth of cash which he claimed may have been planted on him.

Besides anyone he may have talked to privately it would seem those who knew him never expected him to commit this kind of crime.

The majority of people I've seen expressing their opinions online seem to be supporting Luigi Mangione for his actions, while the news, PA officials, major conservative content creators etc have been condemning him, which shows a pretty stark difference between his public perception by regular people who are fed up with the healthcare system and much of the powerful and the wealthy who have more of an influence over the country.

Here is his book review

How do you feel about this story or about Luigi as a whole?

Edited 12/10/2024 20:39:24

obviously a fall man. weird the kid was hiding from cameras and trying not to get caught, while simultaneously going to a McDonald's with a damn manifesto in his backpack lol...

they want to make sure someone is punished, as a deterrent (especially after society response to the assassination)

Just for context about the business in question. UnitedHealthcare is the the largest U.S insurer. They use tactics like claim denials and vertical integration to maximize profits at the expense of patients and providers. The 1973 HMO Act paved the way for their rise with government grants enabling rapid expansion through acquisitions.

They offer a wide network of providers and many plan options, and they provide medicare advantage plans which covers vision, dental and hearing coverage which isn't included in medicare. They offer wellness programs that reward people for completing health challenges and they also offer discount programs.

I think the hatred people have towards this company is still justified but it's not as black and white as it seems. I don't want to be a devils advocate for this company because their high denial rates are a problem but instead of killing people they can get sued to the ground. They have been losing lawsuits recently.

I think we really need to nationalize healthcare here in the U.S, I think, along with serious efforts to lower the price of health foods, stronger efforts to educate the population on healthy lifestyle and food choices, better work-life balances and health initiatives to make exercise and diet more appealing.

Maybe the best thing that comes from this is that it could encourage some politicians to more aggressively campaign on improving the healthcare system here, but otherwise not much really comes out of this...

Edited 12/10/2024 23:26:09

He was the best guy aroooooound, people who hate on him are part of anti-Italian discrimination

Ppl need to realize that Luigi has now upstaged Mario as a vigilante.

But seriously I think this guy is fascinating, whether you like or dislike him.

Edited 12/10/2024 23:33:47

he is engineered to be interesting, imo seems a planted fall guy because they werent gonna find the actual dude

could be... I definitely think it's the right guy though most likely.

Edited 12/11/2024 05:05:18

whoever says violence never solved anything, just show them how the US was formed in the first place. I agree with everything that's highlighted from that book review. I feel as a means of protest, we should be boycotting media companies/large corporations that actively try to deflect this issue into a left/right issue, and do the same old divide and rule all over again.

Also, I'm not advocating for violence against rich ppl, but these insurance companies need to be shut down one way or the other, and doctors' salaries and medical fees need to be capped, and in consequence, so do the prices of houses, student fees of these colleges, funding of these institutes that demand such high payment, and cap profits on all companies to a certain amount.

You can call this socialism or communism or whatever you want, but this is the need of the planet. I'm not advocating for equal pay for everyone, but I am advocating for cap on incomes, both on individuals and on companies.
Climate change is real, and capitalism doesn't give a shit about human lives, so government has to intervene. We need to hold our representatives more accountable for their actions, and for that we need more frequent elections, we need to ban elected representatives from owning stocks, and limit the amount of properties one can own. Atleast until we have switched into 100% renewable sources of energy, we have to curb this capitalist mindset, or we're gonna experience more and more calamities, resulting in wider conflicts than local ones. We cannot afford another world war.

Radicalized midwit, garbage tier manifesto, wasted his life, and how someone sees him is a great proxy for how much weight you should put on their opinions.

Even Tabby had more novel and insightful thoughts

Edited 12/11/2024 06:00:29

No political system is eternal. Over time, societies inevitably reach a breaking point, though the causes of collapse may vary.

Ryiro’s ideas feel like a natural evolution of our current system, offering solutions that transcend ideology and focus on the survival of our planet. This logical approach reframes these ideas as necessities, not simply as "socialism" which carries with it some controversial baggage that might not always be applciable

Ted Kaczynski may have been deeply troubled, but he was undeniably intelligent in many ways and noticed some horrible things that many people didn't. His ideas reflect on the ealization, that 'revolutionary' actions often emerges from living under systems that exploit, destroy and oppress.

Violence is a painful and tragic reality, yet it has, at times provided a direct path to change when other options don't seem to work. The ultra-wealthy may feel pretty invincible, but history shows there is always a point where the oppressed demand change enough to take it into their own hands. :D

However, violence alone cannot build a better future for us as a group. Lasting change requires unity and peace, a collective vision, and a shared commitment to progress.

Edited 12/11/2024 07:21:57

radical centrist vigilante, nothing more

disclaimer: political and opinionated. it is my opinion, and I welcome any criticism or discussion

yea communism... been there done that lol. price fixing is evil. price fixing groceries for example, causes forced scarcity. people will only sell what is most profitable, so less profitable items will only be available to the super rich basically. something's I do agree with ryiro, such as capping doctor salary (imo teachers should be paid more than doctors). we need more housing built (this is easily solved with better housing districts. in major cities people who own expensive real estate pass zoning laws to prevent ppl from building more houses so their real estate is worth more). Climate change is a scam. sure, it's happening. show me the proof humans are causing it (hint: there is none). it's used to push down the peasants so-to-speak. it's eventually going to be used as an excuse to kill off livestock or humans to reduce a carbon footprint. climate change propaganda has a very dark path. reality is we need better renewable resource or more efficient energy, not fear mongering 8 billion people while simultaneously emitting insane amounts of carbon. it's like your roommate saying you need to be quiet while they're simultaneously screaming at the top of their lungs. edit: income tax is bad. oncome fixing is even worse. People should be allowed to earn and pocket their money. but even worse, if you teach children no matter how hard they work, they can only earn "this" much is toxic to society. I don't appreciate this "doomsday capitalism is the end of humanity" talk while people type on their capitalist phone, using the free capitalist internet made by capitalist, for capitalist. capitalism is not perfect (no form of government can be currently), it needs safe guards and checks/balances. preventing monopolies and extortion stuff like that, totally good. when the people who make safe guards become corrupted, then wealth disparity increases and life quality decreases.

Violence is only a last resort. sure America was founded on revolution, but it was dire situation. insurance companies are evil yet nobody has the right to make this decision themself. peace not war, we don't need ww3. thank God for trump, he will bring peace to the world (again)

Edited 12/11/2024 14:24:53

if you think the government is efficiently spending your hard earned money on stuff like climate change, it's a sad joke tbh. the government is only good at money laundering. they will not fix problems, because those problems will get them votes or power or money. government is not to be trusted, especially with something as important as our climate. government should regulate companies and punish them for harming the environment. it's not their job to take our money and piss it into the wind. just seems logical to me

"Ppl need to realize that Luigi has now upstaged Mario as a vigilante. "

I was going to go with
I a prefer a Mario anyway.

But someone beat me to it [sort of] Oh well, nice to see I am not utterly alone in the universe.

Nah I can’t come to any conclusion that makes me want to support him. At the end of the day he chose to murder someone. I don’t think he changes anything. Hell, I doubt this will make the company turn around either. Nor does this shed more light into a subject. It’s a useless, wasteful killing. The issue we have today is multilayered.

1. Health insurance companies are corporations. Which means they have stockholders. Which means they basically have an angry mob of rich people who are threatening daily to move their money away if profits of the company don’t reach certain margins each week. No matter who walks in as the new CEO, even if they’re a saint will not be able to stop the bottom line that the company needs to reach certain goals or lose all their money.

2. The government has enabled this through myriads of bills that allow these companies to aggressively expand and not actual fulfill their purpose, also because congressmen and women are stockholders to insurance and pharmaceutical companies.

So yeah, cool. He killed a CEO. Who got replaced instantly. This did nothing. We could continually kill every CEO 100s of times and nothing would change. They’re the cog in the wheel not the ones actually driving.

I agree with Kenny

America just had a de facto public referendum on whether to embrace socialized healthcare or whether to stay the course with employer-funded healthcare in November. The bad guys won.

Kenny raises some thoughtful points about the complexities of these businesses. I don’t expect much good to come from this situation either.

The justifications I’ve seen online seem overly simplistic, applying a violent solution to a nuanced issue that lacks easy solutions. The tone often feels like, “This company is bad, so the CEO must be bad, therefore harm to the CEO is justified.” That kind of leap is alarming whether you agree with it or not!

I've heard stories of McDonald's employees receiving death threats for ratting him out, and even wanted posters for CEOs appearing on NY streets. That level of hostility feels so extreme! But it makes me think about how society is becoming less empathetic, and there are MANY reasons for that.

I think it's akin to how some people turn vegan after connecting emotionally with animals. They develop empathy from a closer and more personal bond. People who lead more socially isolated lives swamped with responsibilities and stress and carry pent up frustration due to valid injustices may be more likely to find it easy to justify harm against someone they've never met, especially when they represent the corruption that's harming so many lives.

I also wonder about the personal side of this. How does the victim's family feel, seeing the way people are responding to his death with jokes and ridicule? I mean there's already Luigi themed merchandise selling on apparel sites...

ah yes socializing healthcare. saw how well that went with Obama care ;)

All I can say is this, I hope to live my life in such a way that my cold-blooded murder by gunshot to the back does not spark a moral debate around the world as to whether the killer was right or wrong.

I actually mostly agree with his writing in his book review. The system is corrupt. People on here have enough free time to play games so likely aren't the lowest economic class - but let me tell you, those in debt traps are in a situation close to slavery, desperate to survive. And medical debt is one of the biggest mechanisms that get people in huge debt and bankrupcy.

I am a big fan of economist Michael Hudson who explains the economic structure very well and how the rise of the FIRE sector (Finance, Insurance, Real Estate) is so unhealthy for the society and creates even greater concentration of wealth year after year, until eventually there's a kind of collapse. He goes into history to show this happening with empire after empire.

That doesn't mean I'm an advocate for murder, but I also don't condemn those who the state labels as "terrorists" who are using violence for what many people would cause a good cause. Terrorism is a very selective label used only to those the government doesn't like - when it's the government or those it sponsored the label isn't used, and the US government is probably the world's biggest terrorist if the word was neutrally used. Historically, if violence was never used, the US would still be a colony of Britain. But of course there's a huge negative price to violence as well. Which is why my stance is not condemning... but I'm not an active supporter.

The prosecutor will likely be very worried about jury nullification.