This thread got really boring really fast.
High-profile killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO in New York
- Thread starter VorZakone
- Start date
Modern day corporate socialism then I guess.
This is amazing, utterly disingenuous and manipulative:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/13/opinion/united-health-care-brian-thompson-luigi-mangione.html
It reads like the head of Treblinka explaining how he can turn the place around if you give him some time and faith.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/13/opinion/united-health-care-brian-thompson-luigi-mangione.html
It reads like the head of Treblinka explaining how he can turn the place around if you give him some time and faith.
That's the only socialism some will allow, like the bank bailout.
And people wonder why there's so much public sport for CEO hunting
Do people wonder why though? Surely everyone knows.
At best you half some arsed argument that the structure is inevitable instead of by design. The reason this is so monumental is that it's almost logical and an idea that date back centuries. Wilde even addressed it in his essay, The Soul of man under Socialism.
Well there were definitely a couple earlier in this thread but you're right, most people were on the same page immediately
I think was a joke about how huge swathes of the US views any public funding of services and institutions as socialism. Apart from military and law enforcement, interestingly.
Even they know why though.
They do all sorts. Some public some not. Their success has led to loads of copycat agency setups and private companies doing similar work.
The US leads the world on this stuff. Amazon spends more on R&D than every company in the UK combined.
To some extent - but again, they assume a lot of risk as only 5-10% of drugs that enter clinical trials make it to market and it costs $1-2 billion to fund a trial.
So yes they definitely benefit from public funding for research - but at the same time the certification process and infrastructure invested to manufacture these (increasingly) complex molecules is hugely onerous.
Oh wow. It is mind blowing. Also, I am sorry to here that. I can't imagine working all your life to being ruined for something that any functional society would be able to provide
Thanks for the clarification. I asked a couple of times and i needed an answer like that. Good to hear
Bu as @Pogue Mahone said, should be some sort of buy out of the investigation via start up creation, right?
Yes that is often the case as well. Most of the time (though not always) the initial research in a lab will be funded by a grant from NIH.
That's got to be a department Trump wants to defund.
It isn't just the US, the UK and pretty much every major Government do this
From AI
About 10–20%of drugs that enter clinical trials make it to market and are approved by the FDA. This success rate has remained relatively unchanged over the past few decades.
The process of developing new drugs is costly and uncertain. The average cost to develop a new drug ranges from less than $1 billion to more than $2 billion. It can take 10–15 years on average to develop a new drug, from the initial discovery through regulatory approval
But the US spends a good 50% more than Europe on it.
In $$$ terms probably the amount $43 billion per year is about 1% of the Federal budget, in GDP % terms the US is is number 4
US spends 3.5% of GDP on R&D. Uk is 2.7%, EU is 2.2%. Oecd figures.
The UK changed the way we calculate apparently, we were 1.x% before that. I know we've been rock bottom of the G7 for something like 27 of the last 30 years.
Last edited:
Of course they did. Feck me, how many times do you hear this from US agencies or the Police?
Like Arsenal Wenger doing victory laps about players he almost signed.
I bet
Pure altruism I’m sure
I mean, obviously it would be preferable if he’d spent the beginning of covid doing coke out of hookers arseholes, while pointing and laughing at news footage of medics working 48 hour shifts. But maybe he’s not a completely one dimensional villain? In fact I’d say that’s likely. What with life being all messy and complicated.
Not that this changes any of the main issues at play here, obviously. It’s still not very nice to deny sick people the cover they thought they had for hospital bills. Or shoot people in the back. Both are very mean things to do. One of them might have been for the greater good though? Too early to tell for sure.
From an ethical point of view, I have a lot more of an issue with what Thompson did than what Luigi did.
If we are talking about the actual acts without any context, then cold blooded execution is obviously a very violent and shocking act, I personally find it more shocking how desensitised people are to these for-profit algorithmic death sentences in the name of that sweet sweet capital.
The overwhelming support for Luigi after the murder gives the impression that people aren’t as desensitised to what Thompsons’s company does as you seem to think. If anything they’re more desensitised to someone being shot in the back. So long as the murderer has a nice smile and killer abs.
I said “people”, I didn’t specify which
You've bought the messaging, but this isn't actually the case. The important thing here is the act, the victim, and the motivation, while the physical characteristics are entirely incidental. They're just something for people to latch onto, but they would have done the same no matter what he looked like.
Yeah, I’d say you’re probably right. I just wanted to use that “nice smile and killer abs” line. I thought it would sound cool.
I pictured you wearing cool sunglasses while typing it, so it sort of worked.
Fecking hell keep that shit to PM's. Don't need to be reading your pervy messages and fetishes.
How do you go about separating inhumane systems from individuals that have the most agency within them?
Or a motive that resonates.
The revolution starts now!