305

UnitedHealth CEO Sparks Uproar After Unbelievable New York Times Op-Ed (newrepublic.com)

submitted 5 days ago by Joker@sh.itjust.works to c/politics@lemmy.world

32 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The New York Times has published the most inane op-ed after the shooting of the UnitedHealthcare CEO.

top 32 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] saigot@lemmy.ca 135 points 4 days ago

archive of the original NYT article here for reference.

Yet we also are struggling to make sense of this unconscionable act and the vitriol that has been directed at our colleagues who have been barraged by threats. No employees — be they the people who answer customer calls or nurses who visit patients in their homes — should have to fear for their and their loved ones’ safety.

The subtle implication that all the vitriol is directed at front line workers instead of the executive team is infuriating and calculated.

Health care is both intensely personal and very complicated, and the reasons behind coverage decisions are not well understood. We share some of the responsibility for that. Together with employers, governments and others who pay for care, we need to improve how we explain what insurance covers and how decisions are made.

A hollow apology, the problems with US healthcare is not a communication problem.

Those were the only two sentences that aren't just empty platitudes in my opinion, at least within what I can read for free.

[-] henfredemars@infosec.pub 46 points 4 days ago

“I’m sorry you feel that way.”

[-] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 23 points 4 days ago

I would argue that it is a communication problem. If the insurers actually told us what they don’t cover we would refuse to pay and that would drive down prices.

More communication and understanding is exactly what we need. I shouldn’t need a lawyer to understand what my insurance covers.

[-] Seasm0ke@lemmy.world 18 points 4 days ago

They dont even see the patients they bankrupt cripple and murder as paying for their own care

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 136 points 5 days ago

I thought they didn't want to provide a megaphone to murderers.

[-] deegeese@sopuli.xyz 105 points 5 days ago

That’s just for the poor.

Rich murderers get to publish op-eds defending other rich murderers.

[-] henfredemars@infosec.pub 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

No rules if you got money.

[-] shittydwarf@lemmy.dbzer0.com 130 points 5 days ago

New York Times aiding and abetting mass murderers

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 44 points 5 days ago

If they let Netanyahu write op-eds, why not give the small time mass murderers a chance too?

[-] oakey66@lemmy.world 44 points 5 days ago

They’re already helping to abet a genocide. Why not mass murder?

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 days ago

I mean, they're already aiding and abetting the fascist apartheid regime of Israel and act as stenographers for killer cops, so supporting the atrocities of the powerful is very much established as their comfort zone..

[-] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 81 points 5 days ago

This guy ~~earns~~ receives your annual salary every fucking day of the year, and after taking hundreds of dollars from us every month to secure health care, he has the gall to tell 1/3 of us that we should just die rather than receive treatment.

Fuck him with a pineapple.

[-] sakodak@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago

Pineapples have enzymes that digest flesh. Make sure to score it a few times first.

[-] AtariDump@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Pineapple Shove

[-] watson387@sopuli.xyz 3 points 4 days ago

Backwards

[-] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 5 points 4 days ago

First one way, then the other.

[-] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 4 days ago

Then sideways

[-] foggy@lemmy.world 67 points 5 days ago

I will never trust any news source that uses the scowling face of Luigi to tell this story.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 4 days ago

Still better journalism than the NYT coverage.

[-] TrueTomBombadil@lemmy.world 56 points 4 days ago

Damn I hope United health care CEO Andrew Witty is fine and a second shooting doesn't happen to him. It would be so sad. So sad.

[-] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 20 points 4 days ago

Look, man. I only have so many thoughts and prayers at a time. I gotta recharge from an outlay like ... that other suit.

[-] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 9 points 4 days ago

(D)on’t (D)o (D)at

[-] Clent@lemmy.world 38 points 4 days ago

The myth: "CEO's have it so rough, all that responsibility of having to make life or death decisions weighs on them"

The reality: "Not my fault"

[-] Floon@lemmy.ml 20 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

What a tone-deaf, passive-voice "mistakes were made, no one is to blame, least of all us" sack of shit. You will fight any attempt to change this system that is making you disgustingly rich. The wall isn't long enough for the healthcare executives that need to be lined up.

[-] Etterra@discuss.online 14 points 4 days ago

Cool story NYT. It's not like you're part of the problem or anything.

Out of curiosity, how much does your CEO make?

[-] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago

The governor of New York should issue Luigi Mangione a full pardon. He did nothing wrong. What he did was an act of justice.

[-] henfredemars@infosec.pub 11 points 4 days ago

I cordially invite the New York Times to send me a hard copy of their article such that I can wipe my ass with it.

[-] Etterra@discuss.online 7 points 4 days ago

Let them hate us so long as they fear.

[-] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 6 points 5 days ago

What’s “op-ed”?

[-] kamenlady@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago

used to describe a piece of writing that expresses a personal opinion and is usually printed in a newspaper opposite the page on which the editorial is printed.

Source

[-] Sciaphobia@lemm.ee 14 points 5 days ago

Opinion pieces from the paper's editorial board, and outside contributors.

[-] WammKD@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 5 days ago

The origin of the term “op-ed” is derived from the piece originally having appeared on the “opposite side” of the newspaper from the editorial page.

this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2024

305 points (98.7% liked)

politics

19223 readers

2928 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News