next time I hear “there is just too many (brown) people” i swear
You must log in or # to comment.
and their customers have nothing to do with it? Does this person just completely not understand what a market is?
Knowing their names doesn’t matter, you cannot make things illegal for specific people nor would that help. You have to write and pass legislature to make it stop, and that’s why we’re at a fucking standstill on everything: a large majority don’t believe in legislature as a basic concept or solution.
Should I be worried that my initial response to this is “Hmm, so we might be able to improve the world with a serendipitously timed anthrax outbreak at the next WEF summit?”
About the response itself? No.
About the situation that made that response understandable? We’re way past “worried”.
I mean, somebody is going to have to do a little terrorism…
Just a little bit, as a treat.
So call a convention and when they all bus in, 3 RPGs could clear a lot of air
Money like that, you fly in on your own helicopter, so you don’t have to ride in the less comfortable helicopter for your entourage.
Apropos that, I wonder sometimes how “100 bullets” might play out IRL
historians estimate about 200,000 to 300,000 germans were directly involved in the Shoah. many more profited from it.
Yeah, kinda like that time Brian Thompson got shot, and the next day United Healthcare ceased to exist.
Not saying that the general point of corporations doing more harm than people is wrong. Just that if you think that the corporation is just one person, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.
Operant conditioning, also called instrumental conditioning, is a learning process in which voluntary behaviors are modified by association with the addition (or removal) of reward or aversive stimuli. The frequency or duration of the behavior may increase through reinforcement or decrease through punishment or extinction.
Within a week of the killing, BCBS backed out on some of their upcoming bullshit and United Heathcare’s pre-authorization rejection rate has decreased dramatically in the aftermath.
Thimpson’s death (at the hands of someone whose identity we’ll never know for sure) was objectively good for the insured.
if that continues to happen, trust me, eventually none of these fuckers will be left in line.
deleted by creator
United Healthcare’s stock is down 60% since the incident. United Healthcares board and new CEOs lowered the rejection rate of patients out of fear as well. Say what you want about the morality of what was done. The efficacy speaks for itself
The efficacy lasted for all of a month before returning to where it had been before.
So, UHC stock was up around 600, dropped to a bit over 200, and is lately around 300. So like ¾ of the drop is still there in linear terms, or something like ⅔ in logarithmic terms.
That’s true, and my bad for implying otherwise.
But I also think much more critically, they’re back to denying coverage exactly the way they were before Thompson died.
I have no knowledge to refute that latter point, and I am inclined to think it is very likely true.
Well then we just need to stagger the killings in intervals to keep them in check. Simple solution.
tl;dr Find a better method.
Repeated use of the same drug will bring marginal gains.
Companies will evolve to create lower cost (lower impact) figureheads.Cruelty works best when it is used all at once.
Operant conditioning, as stated by EldritchFeminity above, is better applied in a case where you have higher levels of control over the subject’s environment.If you do want to continue doing so slowly, then you need to accompany this with other operations…
like using the shock period to gather opinions into a voice gives a clear-ish indication to what behaviour caused the event and what change in behaviour would prevent further repetition.
One might think that it is something very obvious and everyone knows the difference between what they are doing vs what they should be doing, but sometimes just saying it out loud makes a big difference.This is one methodology where an authority would excel at. And this particular methodology would horribly fail with a non-authority.
But any authority needs to be trustworthy, which requires consistency. And considering how all pre-established authorities are collectively deciding to fall towards inconsistency, I see authorities failing and hence, the methods that work with authority.
The stock drop would be expected, but is there any credible source that denial rate dropped?
They seemed pretty mortal to me yeah, idk why anyone would say otherwise
Then maybe the treatment needs more than a single dose.
Yup. After 9/11 for a while it seemed every week or two the news would report that “The leader of Al Qaeda” had just been killed or captured. Not a false statement, yet it happened again the next week.
Maybe we should assign these fuckers playing cards like Bush did 👀
I just want to say that the idea that we could develop a crowdsourced bounty system on the dark web using cryptocurrency would be illegal and I would never publicly support it.
The way in which Luigi was arrested is part of their safety checks. A way to motivate working class to turn people in, without paying them. I generally thought reward money worked.
I learned it did not work from a podcast that no longer exists. Michael Bazzel’s OSINT podcast talked about it within the context of people who used OSINT to find people on wanted lists and how reward money collection actually works. (Podcast doesn’t exist any more, the copies of the casts went away with the podcast.). Sadly, there’s no replacement for this type of news and info condensed down into one place. It’s also a niche area of information, not followed by many.
Those McDonald’s workers were not paid for turning Luigi in. But they thought they would be.
Even so, look at the bigger picture. How many Luigi’s have there been since 1981?
Most people avoid confrontation, spending most of their days sitting in a chair or lying down, and thinking/hoping/wishing a white knight is going to rescue them from their situation. It’s one reason why so many people exist in bad relationships (1 or a chain of them). Because they think that other person is going to rescue them from their sad days of avoiding confrontation while sitting in a chair or lying down, most of the day for most of their days. Hoping. But never doing. Thinking about doing. Maybe spouting off on the internet about doing. But never doing.
find people on wanted lists and how reward money collection actually works
How does it actually work?
Generally? It doesn’t.
See making the call to tip off the cops makes you eligible for the reward. If you called the correct tip/reward phone number. So that’s the first road block.
Even then, you aren’t automatically getting the reward. No. There are still hoops to jump through.
As a note these additional hoops also apply when there isn’t a specific phone number.
According to the FBI’s website, I’d link but I’m on my phone, someone (an agent, a prosecutor, etc) has to put your name forward in a nomination package.
This is then reviewed by the FBI and other agencies, it’s kind of vague.
Anyway these agencies decide if you get a reward and what percentage.
And none of this can start until after a conviction is secured.
A lot if time, as one example, it’s conditional on conviction. So not only do they have to cat h the guy they have to win in court. That’s not money in exchange for the tip itself.
Yeah, kinda like that time Brian Thompson got shot, and the next day United Healthcare ceased to exist.
Their HP definitely went down. And, anecdotally, I heard from a pharmacist friend that they were approving claims like nobody’s business for the next day or so
Kemp is alive and governing Georgia as far as I know but I’m happy to be corrected if that’s wrong. You may be thinking of Brian Thompson who involuntarily resigned his position as the CEO of UnitedHealthcare on a NYC sidewalk.
Ah damn, you right. Should have Googled it. Too many Brian’s in the news, lol. Got the wires crossed.
Editing to fix.
You did have my hopes up for a moment.
There is also a societal dependance on some of the status quo. The bigger issue is how hard they actively resist the change. A lot of places still rely on trucking at a minimum to fill the groccery store with food wrapped in plastic, most of which is powered or made by fossil fuels. We need to electrify and diversifying but they cling to oil and have way too much power in governmental decisions to prevent or reverse any reduction in dependance for their products.
the post is about who is doing it, who is responsible,
it’s supposed to make the problem less abstract
So you’re saying me taking out some replaceable oil execs is going to make people have less demand for oil and everything that comes from it?
But there isn’t a “demand” at least not as much as years ago. We are trying to switch to renewables but the oil execs keep killing the renewable progress. The horse fucker in the white house won’t let us move on. He kills wind and solar and forces the coal plants to stay open.
And that horse fucker won more votes than Kamala.
There’s a whole party where resistance to green tech is one of the items of faith, hundreds of millions of people. Not just a handful of oil execs. (And yknow, the millions who still use gasoline in their cars etc.)
Edit: That’s not to mention all those who like to fly places.
People keep curling out small humans, so oil-derived fertiliser is the only thing preventing a famine that would kill billions.
You could argue it, but at the same time no one prevents you from going to AliExpress and buying cheap solar. The fact that US decided not to invest, does not mean solar on global scale is doomed. Rest of the world is doing pretty well
I honestly have to wonder at what point people will collectively say “why the hell are we letting them do this” ? Not sure what happens after that, but it seems like it must have to happen at some point, right? Right?
Never underestimate the power of inertia. Some people live their entire lives on it.
Because the average American and European feels their convenient lifestyle is more important than the life of the planet. They’ll talk the talk about the environment, but they won’t walk the wall with their votes or actions.
Please do not put Europeans in the same pot with US Americans. These days are altogether over but for the topic of fighting climate change things were different for quite a while.
You are. Don’t pretend you aren’t, on climate issues. You’re doing more than the usa, yes, but no where even close to enough.
If so then we are all in the same pot. Who is doing enough or more than that?
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/mapped-renewable-energy-by-country-in-2022/
I would say anyone who is above 70% renewables is potentially on track. But you need to take heating and cars into consideration for usage, as well as the carbon impacts of imports and various industries… So really,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita
Including this information, maybe some random small African nations.
Exactly.
Because the people in positions to do something about it get paid by the evil doers to make sure business is as usual
The problem its not just some rich guys they are just the hitmen. Its PetroStates that are behind them. Its not about money at this point its about power and a house of cards those states put in place completely propped up by oil. As in if they stop oil their Nation collapses and they dragged from into the streets and eliminated.
Had a few seconds where I thought “Wired” was referring to the tech magazine and wondered what “Tired” is, who would choose name for their magazine or whatever?
TIRED: A magazine for millenials and Gen X
https://www.forbes.com/real-time-billionaires/
Sometimes I like to gaze lovingly into their faces while writing their names in my diary.
Something to remember about the Forbes List: the most terrible people of all, aren’t even on it. There is a level of wealth that floats above mere billionaires, for which there almost isn’t even a category. Forbes knows not to mention these families in the context of some tawdry popularity contest among nouveau riche Techno Trash. They are mostly centuries old multi-generational wealth like monarchies, the Rothschilds, sheikhs, organized crime families, dictators, etc.
They aren’t on the list, but they hold the real wealth, and more importantly, the real power. Everything else is an illusion of their making.
My understanding of it is that its not really some conspiracy to hide the top wealth; the forbes lists are all opt- in. They reach out to a bunch of Uber wealthy, people, and those who want in send back bios and stats for them to rank and publish.
At least that’s the way it was explained to me. I dated an heiress for a while, and at one point her dad told me hed only ever had his name on the list for one year, and that was as part of the ‘debut campaign’ for his second wife.
Of you look ar the list it makes sense. It’s mostly the new rich, people still seaking validation and status from their wealth, the sociopaths and a lot of the tech bilionaires like elon and zuckerberg who treat it like a competition, and people who benefit from the name recognition and status perception for their company, like all the fashion and design company owners using it to help associate their brands with luxury, and the investment banker types like Bloomberg, ken griffin, etc, who use it to show success of their companies and get other rich people to invest with them.
So, vampires. They’re vampires.
That page 404 errors for me. Here’s an alt:
It’s a reminder that large problems are often tied to concentrated power. Holding systems accountable while still pushing for collective change is probably the most constructive path forward.
If only there was like a deck of cards with their faces on it.
Kind of. It’s the system they operate under, capitalism.
Get rid of those specific people and you would have others people take their place.
However, not to say that it isn’t worthwhile to also bust out the guillotines
If you bust out the guillotine, the people who replace them will behave as if they’ve seen what happens when the guillotines get busted out.
Renewables+nuclear is cheaper and in a truly free market would beat out oil
Cheaper is not the same as more profitable. It’s an important distinction. You can’t own and control the sun and charge people to harvest the energy. Monopolizing and gatekeeping are the end goals of capital owners.
Unless you think the Chinese market is more free. They’re producing solar panels like crazy.
Oil is only profitable for the people producing oil, which is not most people
That’s… the point
Then? More people have the incentive to break from this than not
Let’s take a famous adage of “teach a man to fish” and attempt to demonstrate these two business strategies. Let’s bend this metaphor to the point of breaking. Fish are the analog for energy.
Business model #1: (solar panels) You make fishing poles so that people can fish on the lake for themselves. After you sell someone a pole, you no longer have that person paying you more money unless they break it. It’s a fairly straightforward business that allows people to get their own food.
Business model #2: (oil) You own the lake, you own the boats and fishing poles. You pay people a wage to fish, that are yours too. You pay people to sell your fish, you build infrastructure to wall off the lake. You pay guards a wage to protect your lake from people that want “free fish”. If people want food, you have leverage over people through ownership of all the assets and lake. You can raise prices when you want. As your fish business is successful you buy up all the lakes around and get a monopoly. Maybe you intentionally don’t merge with 1 or 2 other companies to prevent government regulation against monopolies and effectively raise prices in unison (it’s called price leadership). A freer market will just make this control worse and more pronounced. A new fuedalism will emerge of a few kings and serfs that own nothing and rent from people that own.
It’s more expensive, less efficient, less egalitarian, but it will be more profitable because you own it.
OK. Oil is only profitable for a select few people now. Why don’t we rise up in arms to change production and seize the means of production now? More people have incentive to now than not (most people are not oil billionaires), why doesn’t it change?
Coercion through state violence, a propaganda apparatus telling you the only way to structure society is through capitalism, and treats to sedate the masses from revolting against their living conditions.
A magic nebulous “more free” market doesn’t change that.
One path requires a break from capitalism through a mass revolution and the other doesn’t
Imagine if we just locked all the doors and firebombed Davos. Could save humanity in one day of work.
edit: for legal reasons I wish to clarify this is a joke
edit: for legal reasons I wish to clarify this is a joke
Sure {wink!} 😉
This is good joke! Very funny that nobody has killed these people! L O L
