Summary

Brian Thompson, CEO of UnitedHealthcare, was fatally shot in a premeditated attack outside the New York Hilton Midtown before speaking at an investor conference.

The gunman, still at large, fired multiple times, leaving shell casings marked with the words “deny,” “defend,” and “depose.”

Authorities suggest Thompson was targeted but remain unclear on the motive. His wife confirmed prior threats against him.

Analysts speculate a possible vendetta tied to his company. The case raises questions about executive security, as Thompson lacked personal protection despite known risks.

  • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    155
    ·
    2 months ago

    “The motive remains unclear” is one of those things that, as a journalist, you know you have to write because it is absolutely the truth, but you hate yourself for every letter of every word because you know how fucking stupid it sounds given the circumstances.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Unless it turns out he was murdered by, for example, an irate shareholder who didn’t make the money he wanted to make.

      There is more than one reason he could have been murdered.

      • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Absolutely, hence why they do have to say that the motive is unclear. While we all have strong theories about why this happened, there are plenty of other possibilities that have to be considered. Could have been taken out by his family for insurance money, could have been a business rival, the guy might have gotten in shit with the mob. At this point they just don’t know.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Exactly. We just don’t have enough information yet and it is just silly to assume this is some sort of just world where people behind atrocities that are subsequently murdered are murdered because of those atrocities.

        • Skiluros@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          The impression I got from when I lived in the US is that at his level, US oligarchs generally don’t like getting their hands dirty and there are strong communal disincentives to disrespecting “honour among thieves” laws. All the oligarchs groups will gang up on you if you use direct violence against another oligarch.

          From what I’ve read, the “mob” in the US largely has no power, definitely nothing on the level of Brian Thompson. Even transnational groups (Mexican cartels, EU gangs, central American gangs) keep a low profile in the US and make a concentrated effort to avoid publicity.

          I will admit, family issues is a possibility. Difficult to say. The business rivalry or mob connection doesn’t seem even in the realm of possibility, but I could be wrong.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Nah, that’s a cop out. They could absolutely find somebody speculating on the motive to quote if they wanted to.

    • Draces@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      That seems like terrible wording. Why not just say the motive is unconfirmed with the suspect if that’s what’s needed to state it as fact?

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    133
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    As of about a month ago there had been ~320 murders in NYC this year.

    Yet this single one has captured the media’s attention nationwide and cops seem to be heavily focused on this one.

    Because modern society at pretty much every institutional level sees the wealthy and powerful as not just more important than us, but they dont even see us. Hell, compare this to school shootings that only make local news now.

    Historically, societies like this end in an incredibly brutal fashion. And until the wealthy and powerful really can build terminator style robot armies…

    The masses are always going to win.

    It’s kind of the natural consequences of hyper concentration of a finite and essential resource. People rarely sit around and starve voluntarily, and once the majority are starving, people start acting like a mob.

    We see it day to day over minor stuff where people just refuse to follow societial norms. Everyday we’re shown that rules don’t really matter, and none of the people who matter are held accountable. If someone isn’t physically stopped from doing something, they take that as permission. Hell, that was the defense of most 1/6ers.

    The social contract was invalidated a long time ago, people are just now realizing it. And that’s the only thing that really seperates us from animals.

    Crashing out is gonna be the norm pretty fucking soon, I don’t think we have 4 years or that trump will be able to hold society together.

    There’s a very high chance we’re gonna live in some interesting times.

    • makyo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think the biggest thing to emphasize - and you mentioned it but I think it bears repeating over and over - is that when the system fails to enforce justice, people will seek justice themselves. This is the social contract you mentioned. I think we should expect more of this until the system is reformed and people like this do face justice within it.

      • Lightor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        2 months ago

        “When peaceful disobedience doesn’t work the people don’t stop being disobedient, they stop being peaceful.”

    • octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      There’s a very high chance we’re gonna live in some interesting times.

      That was a well written post, but DAMN am I sick of living in interesting times!

      I want boring times please for awhile. BORING times.

    • oxjox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Dude. This event is like a page out of Batman. If you don’t think this is news, I can’t imagine what you think is.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      That said, very few of those murders were not point blank assassinations in public during the day. That’s sort of a bigger deal.

      Edit: Me not inglesh gud.

  • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    74
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I sure hope nobody copies this behavior of retribution against the billionaire class which is responsible for almost all of the worlds suffering.

    Thoughts and Prayering so hard right now.

    • oxjox@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      79
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I sure hope the internet isn’t a reasonable indicator of how the general public feel about CEOs and billionaires. There are in fact many fantastic CEOs and billionaires who donate and focus their time and money and corporations to benefit communities. There’s more than a reasonable argument that without billionaires, the planet would be suffering more.

      This movement of hating on the mega wealthy is misguided. It’s not like billionaires are actually hoarding wealth - they don’t have billions stuffed under their bed. They own companies and stock in companies that are worth money. The money is used to create or buy other companies, to invest in other companies, to create new opportunities, to create jobs.

      The Board of Directors are decreasing overhead and increasing profit margins to satisfy Wall Street’s hunger. This is due to changing government regulations, mostly lead by Republicans. The Republicans want limited government, the dismantling of federal programs, an increase in private corporations, and greater opportunities for the wealthy to generate income off Wall Street speculation.

      This act should be condemned and the murderer should be sent to prison.

      Murdering one person isn’t going to accomplish anything. Murdering all the CEOs isn’t going to accomplish anything. It may feel good to you that this person’s family has lost someone they love in retribution for all the families who have lost the people they love. But it’s not going to prevent anyone else from dying.

      Hopefully, after the crowd chills out from seething at the teeth, we can get back to discussing how fucked our health care system is. Oh, sorry - we just elected someone who explicitly says he’s going to make health care worse and more expensive.

      Maybe we should give a shit about our government and who we’re voting for.
      Maybe we should be shooting each other instead of these CEOs who present more as a symptom of the illness.

      Edit: I’m going to take that back. It’s clear that people are just angry about anything and everything. It doesn’t matter how or why or its relevance. It’s not just the internet, clearly. This is how we ended up with another Trump administration. Irrationality and fear are all that matter. Science, facts, context, intelligence, education; all passé. We are the mob standing by with pitchforks.

      • Furedadmins@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        2 months ago

        Health isurance companies are literal death panels. Every CEO, board member, director or executive have blood on their hands. They should be living in fear.

        • oxjox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          2 months ago

          Cool. You think murdering people is the right way to do that or maybe better government regulation?

            • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              2 months ago

              Classic case of treating the symptoms while ignoring the cause. Somebody else is just going to take the CEO position. You celebrating their deaths isn’t going to change a damn thing

              • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                2 months ago

                In America? What does “treating the symptoms” look like? We couldn’t get any real change under Biden and now we’re headed into a dictatorship. We’re past the point of doing anything about the climate change that the rich brought us, so anything we do isn’t going to change a damn thing.

                Also, statistically speaking, changing the CEO of UnitedHealthcare could bring their denial rates down. It’s the industry leader. Anyone else could be a positive change.

          • samus12345@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            The US just voted in fascism. There will be far, far less government regulation (of corporations and the rich).

            • oxjox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              Big time. I’m literally stocking up on things I might need to get me through the next four years.

          • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            2 months ago

            No, but in the total absence of government regulation its the only option available. It’s not good, but at least it exists.

      • 31337@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 months ago

        Sounds like you’re making e/acc-like (effective altruism) arguments. Which basically is to make as much money as possible to use that money for positive change. It’s very flawed, because 1) to make as much money as possible, you need to exploit workers, customers, or investors, and 2) it’s authoritarian in nature. The wealthy are extremely out of touch with reality, and their priorities and ideal of what “positive change” is generally don’t align with the populace, or what’s needed most.

        I don’t think murdering CEOs is the answer, but I do hope the working class becomes more class conscious; the wealthy class sure is, and has never stopped waging class war.

        • oxjox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          Did I say make as much money as possible?

          A business should make as much money as needed to cover overhead and make enough profit to meet their business plan. The better that company is at achieving that goal, the more valuable that company is.

          I reject this notion that all businesses exist to exploit workers.

          The wealthy people I know are all very involved with helping the poor and sick. They’re genuinely good people from what I personally know of them. Are they doing what the people need most? I don’t know. I know my own city has often invested in programs that weren’t really helping those it intended to help. From what I learned this past year, it’s striking how little government knows who is in need of what.
          This is what we should be having more conversations about. How is it that we have this powerful tool to speak our minds yet so many people are being ignored? Or voting against their own interests.

          • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            I reject this notion that all businesses exist to exploit workers.

            That’s because you don’t understand the basic economic principles under which businesses operate. You think value is created out of thin air and is not a product of human labor.

            I know my own city has often invested in programs that weren’t really helping those it intended to help. From what I learned this past year, it’s striking how little government knows who is in need of what.

            It’s almost like governments do not operate in the democratic interests of the civilian populations they govern…. So strange. I wonder why that could be?

            • oxjox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 months ago

              Value of a brand is created from consumer perspective. Value of a company is created by balancing operational expenses. There is nothing explicit in either of these that is exploitive and to suggest so is a broadly uninformed claim.

              If human labor is involved in a company, why are you all so stuck on the concept that people are not being paid for their work? How is it that simply by being an employer, you are exploiting staff? I mean, I admit I’m totally being exploited at my current job but I’ve had other jobs where I was paid extremely well and given great opportunities. Are you talking about specific industries? Specific corporations? Is the guy selling kabobs down the street from me exploiting his staff?

              You guys are either being dishonest with me or dishonest with yourselves. Or you really have no idea what you’re talking about and just regurgitating what you’ve heard other people say.

              • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                Again, it seems like you have a really vague notion of what value actually is which is what makes you incapable of understanding the concept of labor exploitation. You need to understand the difference between marginal theories of value, which is defined by a circular logic where price determines value and value determines price, and labor theories of value, where people interact with the material world to modify it in some way that gives it added utility.

                How is it that simply by being an employer, you are exploiting staff?

                It’s not that simple. You can be an employer and not exploit the people that work for you. However, doing that means you will not have a profitable business. Profits come from exploitation. Please understand that when I use the word exploitation I’m not making an inherently moral argument about whether exploitation is good or bad. Exploitation is simply a material phenomena. I believe it only becomes a moral issue when undue suffering occurs as a result of said exploitation.

                Is the guy selling kabobs down the street from me exploiting his staff?

                He might be. Small business are often some of the most exploitive workplaces because of how unprofitable they can be. It’s not uncommon for a small business to be forced into situations where they really have no choice but to exploit their staff if they want to continue operating. This is why so many restaurants in the US rely on undocumented immigrants who they can pay less than the minimum wage. It’s a flaw in the way our economy works.

                I mean, I admit I’m totally being exploited at my current job but I’ve had other jobs where I was paid extremely well and given great opportunities.

                This happens to a lot of people in industries where profitability declines. When profits are high, workers in those industries often get paid that they can afford their basic needs. However, as profits wane investors look to bolster them by taking more from their employees. What’s happening in the tech sector is a prime example of such a phenomenon. Unfortunately, this is a tendency that’s baked into the our economy. It prevents long term sustainable from being achieved in industries that are key to our economy but where the opportunities for new markets or innovations are lacking.

                You guys are either being dishonest with me or dishonest with yourselves. Or you really have no idea what you’re talking about and just regurgitating what you’ve heard other people say.

                Have you thought that maybe you’re the one who’s more confident that you really should be? I get that a lot of what I’ve said may contradict vague notions about how the economy works that you may have absorbed simply because you exist within a world steeped in corporate propaganda. However, your beliefs are not ones that any worthwhile economist would take seriously.

          • 31337@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            I’ve known and know business people as well (not extremely wealthy; most have probably < $10M net worth). I don’t think I’ve ever met one that wasn’t trying to make the most money possible (for the businesses they had equity in, and for themselves). They certainly think of themselves as good people, and are interpersonally decent people, but the ideologies they adopt allow them to justify anti-social actions. They brag about being able to secure low-wage labor (third-world workers, unpaid internships, etc), and employing anti-consumer and predatory practices in their products. Anytime they do good, they either have ulterior motives, or it’s just nepotism. Every social interaction they have seems to have a transactional sub-text.

            I reject this notion that all businesses exist to exploit workers.

            Profit is literally the surplus value of the worker’s labor. The workers generate it, and the business appropriates it in whatever way the business owners see fit. This is exploitative, anti-democratic, and damaging to society, imo. Eventually, the owners may take a big payout by selling the company (whose value was generated by the workers), and possibly throw some crumbs to the workers, who may get laid off soon after.

            it’s striking how little government knows who is in need of what.

            Many of the problems with government is it’s beholden to the wealthy, imo. In regards to the U.S., I think the next administration will preside over an almost complete capture of government by oligarchs. I think we will become like Russia or East Asian oligarchies. I’m an anarcho-leaning leftist, so I don’t think large powerful governments are the answer either.

            This is what we should be having more conversations about. How is it that we have this powerful tool to speak our minds yet so many people are being ignored? Or voting against their own interests.

            Most media is controlled by the wealthy/corporations, who either purposely use it to advance their own interests (divide the working class, selective reporting, purposely biased algos, and spinning narratives), or are just damaging as a side-effect of pursuing profits. Honestly, at this point in time, I think most of it is purposeful, and not a side-effect. In “new media” the far-right seems to have an awful lot of money, to the point they’re doing theatrical releases of movies. It’s already came out that some far-right “new media” was directly funded by Russia (an oligarchal nation with ties to the wanna-be oligarchs of the upcoming administration).

            • oxjox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Interesting. The people I now brag about hiring the best people. Bringing them in from top universities around the world and bragging about how well they pay them. Perhaps the people I know are the exception because they are setting the bar for being known as well paying organizations. They’re explicitly paying well to entice people out of other competing organizations.

              Profit is literally the surplus value of the worker’s labor.

              No it’s not. Profit is dictated by the business. Any business sets the price of their good or service in order to cover overhead and expand the business. If you’re sitting at home writing code all day as Ian independent contractor, how are you going to set your hourly wage? Are you going to just calculate what it costs to pay for electric and buy lunch for the eight hours you’re working? I would hope not. You’re going to calculate your expenses and multiple that to reach a figure that pays for the rest of your life plus money for expanding your operations. Are you exploring yourself in order to purchase health insurance or save up for a new computer?

              I’m sorry but I’m tired explaining basic business concepts to people. This shouldn’t be hard. I understand people like Walmart workers and coalminers are treated like shit but this concept that every human who works for a living is being exploited is just trash. You need a better argument.

              • 31337@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                how are you going to set your hourly wage?

                As much as the market will bear, which is what my work is worth according to market principles. What’s just needed to expand operations or whatever only plays the role of setting a minimum price. You seem to keep arguing that people and businesses only charge what’s needed and no more; and very few people or businesses do that (those working for passion, like academic scientists and non-profits).

                Einstein may explain it better than me:

                The owner of the means of production is in a position to purchase the labor power of the worker. By using the means of production, the worker produces new goods which become the property of the capitalist. The essential point about this process is the relation between what the worker produces and what he is paid, both measured in terms of real value. Insofar as the labor contract is “free,” what the worker receives is determined not by the real value of the goods he produces, but by his minimum needs and by the capitalists’ requirements for labor power in relation to the number of workers competing for jobs. It is important to understand that even in theory the payment of the worker is not determined by the value of his product.

          • SmilingSolaris@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            2 months ago

            You know what I find disgusting? Defending people who by their very nature and existence bleed people dry for every dollar they can. At least I hope your guy gets it quick. You hope I bleed my whole life however. Cruel is what you are.

            • oxjox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              9
              ·
              2 months ago

              I’m not defending anyone. I’m saying that it’s disgusting to wish death upon someone else. I’m calling you out for being a horrible human for thinking such a thing.

              Tell me how “by their very nature and existence” a “billionaire” bleeds people dry for every dollar they can. Just a general thought would be fine.

              Then tell me how this applies to the person this entire topic is related to - the guy who was worth less than $50 million.

              I know billionaires who have built hospitals, created organizations to help child cancer patients, donated millions to public schools, created organizations to get homes for the homeless; just to mention a few things.

              If you want to roll with “billionaires shouldn’t exist”, you have to look at what we would lose if they were gone and how we would replace them. Should we tax the wealthy enough so government is run more efficiently? What agency in what level of government is going to organize the creation of the things we’ve lost? Does our government have the will or knowhow to create such programs? How are you going to tax “billionaires” who don’t have billions of dollars of liquidity?

              I hate to use the guy as an example but look at Musk. Do we need electric cars, reusable space rockets, residential batteries, satellite internet? Could someone else have done it? How long would it have taken NASA to get where SpaceX has? How do you start a car company if you don’t have the collateral to back it up? Heck, even Trump built his empire on the lie that he was a billionaire (not that casinos are worthy of this conversation).

              • SmilingSolaris@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                2 months ago

                Elon musk didn’t build a reusable rocket. The people he underpays and overworks did. Case closed. Thanks for proving the point.

      • OnlyJabs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        A violent revolution may not be the answer, but certain things need to happen for the upper class and our government to recognize, in their own way since they can’t seem to relate to the general public, that the people they represent and hold power over are not happy. Yes we vote in our officials, but due to the way the system has changed over the years, gerrymandering and gentrification has made minorities feel wildly unrepresented. Progressives feel wildly unrepresented because they honestly just want the best for everyone in the country while conservatives typically want to maintain the old ways (usually involving sexism or racism). Democrats have done nothing to appeal to the progressives. Republicans have broadened their appeal wildly to even feel desired by those that they truthfully aim to negatively impact. This has been through extreme lies and misinformation spread. Everyone has been talking about “nobody wants to work anymore,” but nobody has been talking about “nobody wants to vote anymore.” It’s disgraceful that we call ourselves a democracy but around 50% of the entire voting populace feels they shouldn’t vote because their vote doesn’t matter, or are put into a position where they can’t vote because of the state they live in.

        I will never advocate for violence. I was not alive during the civil rights movements or the women’s abolition movements, or the worker’s rights movements. I know a lot of people had to die for the people that govern us to pass legislation to improve those conditions. Why do the average everyday Americans have to die in large numbers for legislation to be passed… even locally? I think a few people that have power over us or that govern us being killed is far better than more everyday Americans that lead the labor force. I don’t want random, good CEOs to die. And I think the general public will agree. It’s not like the CEO of Costco was being targeted.

        • oxjox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          has made minorities feel wildly unrepresented

          I dunno, I think it’s the white rural working class who’ve spoke loudest over the past few years. I’m not one of them but I think it’s important to reflect on the fact.

          I agree with everything you’re saying but I would add that we’ve chosen to take an isolationist attitude towards our neighbors who seem threatening or unrelatable to us. Added, the pandemic induced reliance on screens to do everything, we’re just growing further and further away from each other. The media, the ones promoting this initial story, are the ones most responsible for dividing us. They do it for ratings, for stock growth, for promotions and payouts. They do not do it to educate the public. They are not the fourth pillar of democracy.

          The unbreakable walls of division are closings off to bothering to really understand anything. So many people are quick to read a headline and make an unfounded argument for or against it. Does anyone care about this man’s family whom I’m sure loved him? Does anyone care that he wasn’t even a $100 millionaire, never mind a billionaire? No one is telling the good stories about good billionaires. Those who build hospitals, contribute to fighting childhood cancer, who support public schools and build homes for the homeless. Even when given opposing facts about a topic, all people are set in their opinions. It’s a defense mechanism because people are terrified to be kind to one another. Because the media has told us this is what we are now.

          • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            No one is telling the good stories about good billionaires.

            Omg this right here is so funny. You must be blind. Media outlets talk non stop about how amazing, smart, caring, and hardworking billionaires supposedly are.

            Those who build hospitals, contribute to fighting childhood cancer, who support public schools and build homes for the homeless.

            Oh right so do the billionaires actually pour the concrete? Do they administer the chemo to the kids with cancer? Do they put together assignments for students? Do they hammer the nails to frame the house they’re supposedly building? Because as I see it if all they’re doing is signing check then they really haven’t done anything for anyone. It’s just our fucked up society means all the people that actually do good in the world need the sign of from a billionaire. If you don’t have their approval but you still want to work for the benefit of all, tough luck. Rent is still due at the end of the month.

            • oxjox@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              I was not aware media outlets were talking about how amazing and hardworking billionaires are. No. Do you have some examples?

              No. They establish companies (employee people) to build, manage, and maintain these organizations as they dictate. They’re actively involved in the principles of the organization and maintain a seat on the board of directors to ensure upper management is fulfilling their vision. A lot of their work is with lawyers to make sure everything is done legally and to push legislation through city council to keep the project on time. Sometimes a project will involve contributions to the city like parks or public spaces so they work with architects to design those projects too. That’s a very small part of what I’m aware of what they do.

              They are giving away hundreds of millions of dollars for the future benefit of lives well beyond their own time. They’re doing more by establishing these long-term enterprises than they ever could by simply giving out money. Because that’s what makes sense in the reality we live in.

              Are you saying that wealthy people should not use their money to build hospitals or help dying kids?

              • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 months ago

                I was not aware media outlets were talking about how amazing and hardworking billionaires are. No. Do you have some examples?

                Oh come on. If you really are in the room with billionaires at charitable events you know the press is often invited to write puff pieces about how generous they are.

                Are you saying that wealthy people should not use their money to build hospitals or help dying kids?

                I’m saying we shouldn’t let people undemocratically decide whether or not working class people build hospitals and treat dying kids. By advocating that billionaires hold that power you are literally siding against democracy. But hey I guess all those super yachts just need to be built. For the good of society right?

        • oxjox@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’m probably not on the right server. I just picked it cause it was short.

  • Dasus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Authorities suggest Thompson was targeted but remain unclear on the motive.

    Friggin Sherlock Holmes’ over here.

    The case raises questions about executive security

    “We won’t be pressured into changing the system we’ll just protect the rich exploiters better”

  • Itdidnttrickledown@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    2 months ago

    Its simple all you clueless colombos. Just start investigating all denied claims where the person died at a result. Shouldn’t take more than a decade or so to go though that list.

  • taiyang@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    2 months ago

    To those upset that this is headline news because he’s rich, remember that exposure breeds copycats.

  • tyrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    2 months ago

    To those complaining this is news because this is a rich white CEO and shouldn’t be. It’s fascinating to me because it seems like vengeance. It seems like it was well planned. It seems like the killer may have had a personal beef with the insurance company. I don’t usually follow things like this but I think insurance companies are genuinely evil. This one has my interest.

    • gwilikers@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think its good for the same reason that I think extensive media focus on school shooting is bad.

  • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    what’s the phrase -I’ve never wished death upon a person but I’ve read some obituaries with great satisfaction?

  • not_that_guy05@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Insurance companies hate this one trick.

    But no honestly, why are they acting like CEOs are fucking important?

    Just parasites is all they are.

  • cogman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    LMAO. It’s hilarious to me how basically nobody is mourning the death of this dude. Hopefully it is making other insurance leadership start to rethink their careers.

  • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    “Thompson lacked personal protection despite known risks.”

    Oh. Oh ho ho. That is an interesting bit of information.

    Not the lacking personal protection. That does surprise me, but not a lot.

    What does surprise me is the “despite known risks.”

    Was he that arrogant? Or do they, the powerful, greedy, and heartless, fear the wrong things?

    Interesting to consider. The primal instinct to fear for ones life drives the most basic of biology. Is it possible, that this class of individuals lacks that fear? Or is it that there is something that fear more?

    I think we all know the answer to that, of course. They fear losing power and wealth. That’s quite a vulnerability. They protect that wealth and power more than their own life. I feel like I’ve heard about consequences to that.

  • kreskin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 months ago

    Has anyone in law enforcement even done the first step here and put together a list of people who might have a reason to kill this guy? Lets get with the program here, cops.