TV pundits are compensated based on their ability to keep audiences engaged. The people who decide that anger-based engagement is acceptable are, like Brian Thompson, executives.
I don't think any of them deserve to be murdered, but the pundits are an odd place to place blame.
Guns are inanimate objects and cannot be ascribed blame. Gunmen and lawmakers can.
This CEO, in particular, has almost certainly taken actions that resulted in preventable suffering and death.
To some degree, that's the nature of running health insurance companies, but if he put profits ahead of patient outcomes, I think we could have a very reasonable discussion on the morality of letting people die at scale vs murder.
What planet do you live on? Are YOU getting your information and worldview from "TV pundits"?
Corporate greed is a race to the bottom and CEOs are the avatars of that greed. Nobody needs a pundit to tell them that, they're experiencing it first hand for themselves, and you're playing a losing game defending them. You will never convince a man who struggles to pay rent and buy food that a CEO deserves millions of dollars. You will never convince a woman that she deserves to be in thousands of dollars of healthcare debt so that the CEO can buy extra houses and cars.
Human nature will never accept this, no matter how much you wish your libertarian philosophizing about the world was representative of reality. Corporations and billionaires continue to gain power and working class people are getting exploited more and more. There's a breaking point and we're racing towards it fast.
The wealth gap is higher now than it was during the French Revolution, if anyone was interested in "history repeating itself" insights into the future.
"Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents."
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
[flagged]
TV pundits are compensated based on their ability to keep audiences engaged. The people who decide that anger-based engagement is acceptable are, like Brian Thompson, executives.
I don't think any of them deserve to be murdered, but the pundits are an odd place to place blame.
Guns are inanimate objects and cannot be ascribed blame. Gunmen and lawmakers can.
This CEO, in particular, has almost certainly taken actions that resulted in preventable suffering and death.
To some degree, that's the nature of running health insurance companies, but if he put profits ahead of patient outcomes, I think we could have a very reasonable discussion on the morality of letting people die at scale vs murder.
The CEO has bosses, and was presumably doing what they wanted him to do.
1 reply →
[flagged]
5 replies →
What planet do you live on? Are YOU getting your information and worldview from "TV pundits"?
Corporate greed is a race to the bottom and CEOs are the avatars of that greed. Nobody needs a pundit to tell them that, they're experiencing it first hand for themselves, and you're playing a losing game defending them. You will never convince a man who struggles to pay rent and buy food that a CEO deserves millions of dollars. You will never convince a woman that she deserves to be in thousands of dollars of healthcare debt so that the CEO can buy extra houses and cars.
Human nature will never accept this, no matter how much you wish your libertarian philosophizing about the world was representative of reality. Corporations and billionaires continue to gain power and working class people are getting exploited more and more. There's a breaking point and we're racing towards it fast.
The wealth gap is higher now than it was during the French Revolution, if anyone was interested in "history repeating itself" insights into the future.