“He was actively articulating a vision that helped better educate and help people better understand what the company is doing.”
He didn’t deserve to be murdered. But he saw the problem was that WE didn’t understand him using AI to deny 90% of claims, and then outsourcing to get other claims denied. The outside contractors were paid by the denial.
His denial rate was triple the best companies like Kaiser, and double the industry average.
As I say, didn’t deserve murder, but he was a POS and only saw it as a PR problem, not a true problem.
If we had a functioning rule of law, murdering the CEO would not be seen as an acceptable proposition for redirecting the insurance companies.
But we have an increasingly shoddy pretense of law, so here we are. It is astonishing to see how many people on the Left and the Right are cheering about this assassination. That is a big trouble indicator right there. I guess too many people across the political spectrum have been screwed over by the health care system.
The assassination was effective too, at least in the short term. Anybody notice how quickly Anthem-Blue Cross Blue Shield reversed their policies on limiting payments for surgical anesthesia? What a coincidence! [NOT!]
But this will have unintended consequences in the long term, and they will not be good for anybody. Do we really want to see corporate assassination teams denying claims?
"Health insurance" is basically an extortion racket, supported by the government. The insurance companies got what they paid for when they rented all those politicians to create this system. They are not blameless victims of the government. They are cooperating predators.
We already have 100-year-old consumer protection and antitrust laws which could be used to correct this problem, but they are not enforced. They should be.
Laws are a better way to control corporations than assassinations.