this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2024
740 points (91.4% liked)

Showerthoughts

30038 readers
985 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. A showerthought should offer a unique perspective on an ordinary part of life.

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. Avoid politics
    • 3.1) NEW RULE as of 5 Nov 2024, trying it out
    • 3.2) Political posts often end up being circle jerks (not offering unique perspective) or enflaming (too much work for mods).
    • 3.3) Try c/politicaldiscussion, volunteer as a mod here, or start your own community.
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
vatlark@lemmy.world
forkball@lemmy.world
quinten@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
740
The assassination of United Healthcare's CEO is a real life trolley problem, and a select few are trying to argue to save all lives while the train is going to kill the masses. (lemmy.world)
submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by moral_quandary@lemmy.world to c/showerthoughts@lemmy.world
386 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It appears that in every thread about this event there is someone calling everyone else in the thread sick and twisted for not proclaiming that all lives are sacred and being for the death of one individual.

It really is a real life trolley problem because those individuals are not seeing the deaths caused by the insurance industry and not realizing that sitting back and doing nothing (i.e. not pulling the lever on the train track switch) doesn't save lives...people are going to continue to die if nothing is done.

Taking a moral high ground and stating that all lives matter is still going to costs lives and instead of it being a few CEOs it will be thousands.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I think you're getting this kind of backwards. Individual claims aren't denied under universal healthcare. It's not opaque like a private insurer. Specific procedures are the thing not covered, and that becomes part of a national legislative/policy discussion.

[–] bluGill@fedia.io -2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What is the difference if you need a treatment you cannot get

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The fact that the system is transparent, that every one is denied in a way that is public knowledge, makes the system much easier to change. It's not directly comparable to the opaque way that US insurance companies deny claims, and the way you said "often have ways" implies the same level of subterfuge.

I feel like you also missed the other commenter's point entirely. No one makes comparisons on raw numbers, that would be silly. But the rate at which UHC denies claims is likely greater.

[–] bluGill@fedia.io 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Rate is just one data point. I'm back again to asking for in depth analysis. Do people who use UHC submit more bogus claims than those who use other insurance for example? There are many more important questions that need to be asked.

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Holy moly, are you really this much of a bootlicker that you buy "bogus claims" as an excuse for insurance denying people life-saving treatment?

You're right, rate is just one data point. One I think you purposefully ignored now.

[–] bluGill@fedia.io -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I've been around long enough to know that people who want to make a point will yell about one number in their favor and ignore everything else.

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

How's that leather taste mate?