Who is Brian Thompson, UnitedHealthcare CEO killed in New York? : NPR
By: Rachel Treisman (NPR)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
December 4, 20241:39 PM ET
By
Rachel Treisman
Members of the New York police crime scene unit photograph bullets lying on the sidewalk as they investigate the scene outside the Hilton Hotel in midtown Manhattan where Brian Thompson was fatally shot on Wednesday. Stefan Jeremiah/AP hide caption
UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was gunned down outside a Manhattan hotel on Wednesday morning, sparking a search for his killer and an outpouring of condolences.
New York police say the suspect shot Thompson in the chest in a "brazen, targeted attack" at 6:46 a.m. ET outside of the New York Hilton Midtown Hotel — moments before the annual investor conference for UnitedHealthcare's parent company was set to begin.
National
U.S. finds 100 million people were affected by UnitedHealth healthcare hack
Thompson, 50, lived in Minnesota but was visiting New York City for the conference, which has since been canceled. He was taken to a local hospital and pronounced dead.
Within hours, a manhunt was underway for the gunman, and tributes to Thompson were circulating online.
"Brian was a highly respected colleague and friend to all who worked with him," UnitedHealth Group said in a statement , adding that it is working closely with the NYPD. "Our hearts go out to Brian's family and all who were close to him."
He was CEO since 2021
UnitedHealthcare is the health benefits business within UnitedHealth Group, the country's largest private health insurer.
The Minnesota-based company is ranked 4th on the Fortune 500 and employs some 440,000 people worldwide. UnitedHealth Group is so dominant, in fact, that the U.S. Justice Department filed a civil antitrust suit just last month to try to block its proposed $3.3 billion acquisition of rival home health care and hospice agencies.
Thompson was named the CEO of UnitedHealthcare in April 2021.
"Brian's experience, relationships and values make him especially well-suited to help UnitedHealthcare improve how health care works for consumers, physicians, employers, governments and our other partners, leading to continued and sustained long-term growth," Andrew Witty, CEO of UnitedHealth Group, said in a release at the time.
Thompson previously held a variety of executive positions — most recently as the CEO of UnitedHealthcare's government programs businesses, including Medicare — since joining UnitedHealth Group in 2004, according to his LinkedIn profile .
Before that, he had spent more than half a decade working as a CPA at the accounting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers LLC.
Thompson graduated from the University of Iowa in 1997 with a degree in business administration and accounting, according to LinkedIn.
He is a father of two
Thompson is survived by his wife and two children, according to media reports.
Thompson's sister-in-law, Elena Reveiz, told the New York Times that he was a good father.
"He was a good person, and I am so sad," she said.
Thompson's wife, Paulette Thompson, told NBC News that he had been receiving threats.
"Basically, I don't know, a lack of coverage? I don't know details, I just know that he said there were some people that had been threatening him," she said, adding that she couldn't give a more thoughtful response because she was trying to console her kids.
NYPD Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch said at a midday news conference that while the motive for the shooting remains unclear, the preliminary investigation suggests it was a "premeditated, pre-planned targeted attack."
She said the suspect, wearing dark clothes and a mask, was "lying in wait for several minutes" before approaching Thompson from behind and firing several rounds.
Colleagues and public officials pay tribute
Several of Thompson's former colleagues shared recollections of him with the Minnesota Star Tribune on Wednesday, remembering him as a hard worker and a good person.
John Penshorn, a former UnitedHealth Group executive who worked with Thompson for more than a decade before his 2019 retirement, described him as "humble, a servant-leader and family man."
Health Inc.
Cyberattacks plague health care. Critics call the federal response 'inadequate'
"He was just an incredible guy — nice, resourceful," said Steve Parente, a former Trump administration healthcare official who said he had worked with Thompson to implement the system for distributing federal financial aid to health care providers early in the COVID-19 pandemic. "This is just a total tragedy."
Elected officials from Thompson's home state of Minnesota — where UnitedHealthcare is a major employer — also paid their respects on Wednesday, including Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz.
"This is horrifying news and a terrible loss for the business and health care community in Minnesota," Walz wrote.
Trolling, taunting, spamming, and off topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that vote up their own comments, repeat comments, or continue to disrupt the conversation risk having all of their comments deleted. Please remember to quote the person(s) to whom you are replying to preserve continuity of this seed. Any use of the phrase "Trump Derangement Syndrome" or the TDS acronym in a comment will be deleted. Any use of the term "Brandon", "Traitor Joe", or any variations thereof, when referring to President Biden, will be deleted. Right wing trolls can expect to have their irrelevant questions and comments deleted.
Tags
Who is online
274 visitors
sounds like a planned execution that had some inside info to me ...
Yes. Somebody knew what hotel he was in, and when he'd be arriving.
the shooter wasn't a professional. a professional would have been closer to the victim for a head shot, wouldn't have stopped to aim, would have worn gloves because of the gunpowder discharge, and wouldn't have left any brass or or bullets behind.
It looks to me like he had white gloves on.
... another day, more clues. the authorities now have pictures of his face, a cellphone, possibly fingerprints, and allegedly an e-bike battery. it's only a matter of time now ...
... could be, but if so, he put them on just before pulling the trigger. first reports yesterday identified the shooter as a black male, and that was incorrect. since he inscribed the brass casing on one of the bullets, he probably wiped his fingerprints off all the brass. the cellphone they found could be the bigger issue, if it isn't a burner phone ...
In your video and this captured still from CNN, his hands are pure white.
... like I said, I don't know, and, I don't care. two things are certain though, as the CEO of UHC victim was probably anti-ACA and now he's an ex-millionaire chilling at the morgue. bummer ...
Probable reloaded his own rounds (and didn't do a very good job) or bought the worst handgun ever made.
I doubt it, he had to travel with that gun and probably bought the ammo locally. ever since the start of covid there's been certain brands of ammo that don't work as well in my hand guns, along with more misfires. the QA has suffered under the stress to keep up with demand. my S&W .22 LR target pistol used to jam frequently with federal hollow points if I didn't dremel some of the slug castings.
i would look at either some sort of financial scandal , or someone who had a loved one die because United Heath Care denied treatment.
my thoughts as well.
I also wouldn't put it past one of the healthcare providers who were bankrupted or nearly bankrupted by the UHC hack last February (IIRC). They provide the infrastructure for many insurance companies, not just their own, to receive and process claims and email prescriptions. Their answer was to loan those providers money so they could stay afloat. IOW, they were able to quickly put together a loan application process and find money to loan out, but slow to provide either a repair or workaround. Small healthcare offices were hit hard.
bingo
This sounds like a plot for Law And Order.
It does!
what struck me is how soon the media was able to get to the mrs, and she didn't exactly sound inconsolable ...
hmmmm....law enforcement almost always start with the spouse
she has the most to gain by his death, so naturally they have to eliminate her as a suspect ...
Morning..that was my first thought too...
Going by news here the words, deny, defend, depose was written on the bullet..
Sounds like someone was denied help and passed away...the decision was then defended by the health insurance company and then the aggrieved decided to depose of who they deemed responsible for the death of their loved one..permanently...
People are crazy. The ID channel, Dateline, 20/20, etc. are replete with stories of spousal murders. I imagine this guy was worth a lot, his wife probably knew exactly when and where he was, and we know nothing about their relationship or infidelities. The fact that immediate conclusions will focus on his occupation only makes it more tempting for certain suspects to choose to do it in the first place. The fact that she gave a public statement about it at all was weird to me. I don’t think I could compose myself enough to speak if my spouse just got murdered. I’m not accusing anyone of anything, just pointing out that it happens often enough to make tv channels devoted to it.
If this was a murder for hire, the killer was sloppy. They got his face on a camera without the mask. He threw out a coffee cup that probably has his fingerprints and his DNA.
All I know, is if my killer isn't neat and orderly, it would kill me
I’m sure that dude is shitting his pants right now at breath and depth of the state of surveillance in NYC.
NYC is second only to chicago in camera coverage ...
Worse than London
He probably was a good family man but I wouldnt describe the CEO of the country's largest health insurance company as either humble or a servant. Thats not the way it works.
How does it work John? Can you give us some examples of humble CEO's?
It was reported today that his wife said that he had received ‘’threats’’.
Plan holders denied coverage by a guy whose net worth was estimated to be $43 million?
Who "exercised" $20 million of company stock in 2023.
I can just imagine how many people are denied small procedures that may improve their lives or decrease their pain
who might just be upset with the profit structure that results in an uber rich CEO.
"I can just imagine how many people are denied small procedures that may improve their lives or decrease their pain"
I doubt that he had any personal involvement in those decisions. Since we don't know all the facts isn't it a bit presumptuous to blame this professional hit on a denied claim
Does this justify murdering the CEO?
A number of executives were under investigation at UHC by the DoJ for insider trading, it was not clear if he was one of them..
You have to wonder why a regular person, as opposed to a hired hit man, would kill a CEO. I think that it would generally be related to a personal grievance about something the company has done. My guess is that will be true here too.
the motive will come down to the usual choices ...
The way each of my parents died, I don’t wonder at all. For each one of them, I was looking to the doctors and hospitals and asking “how the hell could you let this happen?”
it's not about healthcare to medical insurance corporations, it's a P&L decision ...
He had a very personal involvement in the perpetuation of a system that turns a blind eye to human suffering while making him exceedingly wealthy. And so many other healthcare CEOs and executives are similarly responsible. Fuck him.
[✘]
I'm going to take a pass at joining the "let's gun down fathers because I don't like their job party."
All because he was a CEO of a health insurance company.
That's some fucked up logic right there.
[T][✘]
[✘]
I’m curious what you think he did deserve. Your worship because he’s rich?
I bet he didn’t have to worry about obtaining the life saving/improving medicine he needs.
I bet he was never denied medicine that was more likely to keep him out of the hospital.
I bet he would never have been denied a procedure he needed.
I bet he never had to argue and plead with a bureaucracy to convince them that there was something seriously wrong with him.
I bet he resisted efforts to make those things more available to others.
What does a person like that deserve?
I think he didn't deserve to be gunned down from behind while walking down the street...
What? Is that why you think he had it coming to him, because he's rich? SAD...
Are you moralizing this man's murder? Based on assumption?
Try reading closer. I asked you what you think he deserved - not what he didn’t deserve.
Again, not what I said. Read it again and this time, respond to what I wrote. I didn’t say he had it coming to him. I asked you if he deserved your worship because of his wealth.
I responded to your comment about his involvement. Pretty straightforward.
I see, so obtuseness then. I think he deserved to be able to walk down the street without being ambushed from behind just like anyone else.
I worship no man. Do you?
His involvement in what?
Oh man. You deny your own words.
To which I responded: He had a very personal involvement in the perpetuation of a system that turns a blind eye to human suffering while making him exceedingly wealthy.
Pot, meet Kettle.
I, and others have talked at some length about the state of our health care system and the responsibility for it that this man - and others like him - have. It would be nice if you would acknowledge that, and consider what he deserved based on that.
I think he - and again, others like him - deserve to be held accountable. I personally wouldn’t murder him or even condone it, but I can certainly understand why someone would want to. And considering how many people have suffered and died under the system he controlled, I have a hard time being outraged over it.
I might believe that if you if didn’t keep defending him and/or ignoring why someone might be angry enough with him to kill.
Sure if you say so, I can at least recognize the posts I'm replying to. I didn't say any of that....
Does that make it justifiable?
[✘]
Ahh. I confused Gregs. I’ll try to do better. Maybe you could try reading the thread you’re responding to.
Maybe. Morally, I think it’s a conversation, anyway. If you feel that a man in his position is responsible for the suffering, you might see his death as justifiable. Legally, I’d say no.
I do.
WTF does that mean?
Either read the comments and respond to them with some substance or go bother someone else. I don’t know why you’re here, but it’s clearly not to discuss the issue. Since you find my posts to be so perplexing, why don’t you just stop responding to them?
I keep trying to point to that kind of thing, too, but apparently this whole aspect of the issue is incomprehensible for some people.
Bit of weird suggestion.
I was going with "live out his life without being gunned down by a psychopath".
I kinda consider that a baic human right, but maybe I'm wrong about that.
A lot of people consider healthcare a basic human right. Maybe they’re wrong.
How do you feel about a little accountability while he’s alive?
They are, on a number of levels.
Depends. Accountability for what, exactly?
So, it seems you care a great deal about this guy's life, but little for the lives lost because he wouldn't work to make surgery more available or cheaper. No concern for the people dying of preventable disease because corporate healthcare wont provide for or cover medicines and procedures that prolong life or make it more livable. What is so special about his life versus all the others?
Rich people‘s lives are obviously more important than... well... your life.
It’s all over this discussion. Some random examples are below. All but one happened when this poor man was CEO. Another when he was an executive with the company, the suit coming when he was CEO.
UnitedHealthcare looks to retroactively deny emergency room claims
UnitedHealth uses faulty AI to deny elderly patients medically necessary coverage, lawsuit claims
The use of the allegedly defective AI model, developed by NaviHealth and called "nH Predict," enabled the insurance company to "prematurely and in bad faith discontinue payment" to its elderly beneficiaries, causing them medical or financial hardships
UnitedHealth sued by US Labor Department over 'thousands' of claims denials
.
‘Stunning’ change to United’s colonoscopy coverage roils physicians and patients
I don't think murder is OK, no.
Do cite me saying so.
And I assure you he was working to make surgery cheaper. That's part of his job.
Again, cite me.
His life is unusual in no small part due to the fact that people seem ready to justify his horrific murder simply because of his perfectly legal occupation.
So a few doctors are not renewing their contracts, and you think the CEO of United Healthcare should be "held accountable". What do you suggest is the appropriate measure?
You've listed two lawsuits. Aren't those a means of accountability?
You've also linked to an article where some doctors are "shocked" by a "stunning" process that has been industry standard with all insurance companies for decades.
Hardly seems like cause for public execution of the CEO.
More probably, people get frustrated with an incredibly complex system that they don't begin to understand and they only encounter in their most emotional moments. The CEO of an insurance company makes a simplistic target for their emotional frustration.
It’s problematic the way you seem to feel free to interpret what others write, but you insist on pedantic accuracy in defending yourself. I’ll demonstrate:
You managed to turn my comment that you seem to care a great deal about this guy’s life into the suggestion that you think murder is ok. Here’s another, caused by you breaking my comment in half and twisting the context:
I never claimed you said it. I said it seems like you feel that way. My impression is based on the totality of your comments on the topic. If I got it wrong, just correct the misunderstanding.
And then you did it again.
Just for one day, can you stop trying to “win” the internet? Is it really so hard to just discuss the topic? Maybe answer some questions put to you? Tell us what you actually think instead of just attacking?
Yes, don’t you? I’m not suggesting he should be murdered, but isn’t it pretty normal to think that the people in charge are responsible for the way their business is run?
It’s a means of accountability, but I don’t see healthcare in this country on a general trend for improvement, so it’s an insufficient means of accountability. Suing an entity like UHC is an enormous undertaking, and not realistically an option for most people.
Just because something has been a standard for decades, that doesn’t make it a good thing. And if it’s a bad thing, then all the more reason why people would be frustrated and angry.
Frankly I’m surprised that you seem so resistant to the idea that our medical system might suck in some pretty significant ways, or that corporate CEOs might be responsible for perpetuating that system.
Of course. We have laws, after all, and the killer will be prosecuted. But I can totally why understand why someone might be driven to it.
I need to break that down a little.
Why is it more probable? That seems very dismissive. I think people very much understand suffering because the insurance they pay into every month won’t cover medicines or screening procedures. I think people very much understand losing a parent, spouse, or child because nothing was done while they waited for the insurance company to decide if they would cover something urgent.
As to the system being large and complex, these companies and their executives benefit mightily from that system, so they aren’t interested in fixing it. If anyone complains, all they have to do is say, “it’s complex; you just don’t understand,” and that will shut a lot of people down. The point is, this system shouldn’t be so complex that regular people can’t understand it. It should be simple.
[✘]
If they're violating the law or something, sure. But we don't have any evidence that he organized anything like that. If they're following the rules and we don't like what's happening, then let's change the rules.
I agree I don't think healthcare is improving. That said, it may be the most heavily regulated business in America, and there are regulators everywhere whose sole job it is to investigate complaints, so people do have a lot of other avenues of recourse.
Good or bad, it's sure as hell not "shocking" and no medical provider can honestly claim to be "stunned". At this point, preauthorization is ubiquitous. If that many people were frustrated or angry, the regulations would have been changed. If it's that terrible, we can change it now.
I think it sucks in some ways, but generally not the ways most people assume. The system is far, far, too big for insurance CEOs to have nearly the influence many people claim.
Because people don't understand it. Ask a random person the difference between and HMO, PPO, EPO or point of service plan. Ask them what a formulary is. Or coinsurance. Or what an SBC is. How many days do they have to add a newborn to the plan? What are the rules on COBRA? People just don't generally know.
You can even see it in the comments posted on this forum (for example). We have a guy who thinks that because healthcare in France is government funded that none of the providers are for-profit. I had another guy tell me that we need single payer healthcare because "look how much less expensive USAA is on car insurance". Another lady was adamant that we needed single payer because the average employer policy cost $600/mo (at the time) and Medicare covered people for $150... not realized that was just her Part B premium and that the total cost was well over $1k/mo.
I have a good friend who owns two PT clinics and who was unaware that Medicare not Medicaid covers disabled people.
Health insurance is complicated, so you can certainly understand why people don't take the time to learn it. They have lives that are far to interesting to spend time learning any of that. Then when they really need it most, they are generally in their most emotional state, so you can also understand how any problem is exponentially amplified.
People get upset because a drug their doctor prescribed isn't covered. It doesn't occur to them that the doctor chose that drug because the pharma rep convinced him to, and that another drug will probably work just as well for 1/10th the price. They get upset with an insurer who won't cover something, not realizing that the plan design was written by their employer and the insurer doesn't actually have a choice in the matter. But none of that matters at the time. They just know it isn't working.
That presumes that they wouldn't also benefit from a simpler system, but I'm not sure that actually works out. The Medicare supplement market may be the simplest form of health insurance, and there are far more insurance companies in that business than standard health insurance.
I have a hard time feeling bad about this. Healthcare CEOs created and preside over a system that makes them absurdly wealthy via the suffering and death of millions of people less fortunate than they.
As easy as it is to vilify the small group of very wealthy men, we didn't get here because of them. Health insurance is one of the most heavily regulated businesses in America, we just suck at that regulation.
Healthcare expenditure is not a new problem. Rising medical costs have been a national concern for over 100 years.
The current health insurance system began in the 1920s with a group of teachers in Texas. Employer-based plans started shortly thereafter when GM insured its workers. Healthcare CEOs didn't create this any more than the CEO of Lockheed created the Air Force.
We have the power to regulate this properly, we just don't. We have no one but ourselves to blame.
I couldn’t care less that they’re wealthy. I care what they’re doing to get wealthy and stay that way.
So what? That’s like we shouldn’t judge slave owners because they didn’t invent the practice of owning people. The option to free the slaves is always available. It’s like saying Catholic priests shouldn’t be judged for abusing children because it’s been going on for so long.
If anyone has the power to really change the system, it’s the CEOs of healthcare, pharmaceutical, and insurance corporations - people who have no problem getting whatever healthcare they want.
And this furthers the point. We hear all the time about the power of capitalism and the private sector, but here you are saying it’s all up to the government. I think government could do a lot, but every time we try to use the power of government to improve access and lower costs, guess what healthcare CEOs do? They do everything in their power to resist that regulation.
Just imagine if they all got together with a plan to genuinely improve healthcare for the average person and took the idea to the government. There wouldn’t be months and years of debate on Capitol Hill. It would happen immediately with bipartisan support. Only the lobbyists would be pissed.
[✘]
Thanks for stopping by. We are all thankful for your enlightened and substantive contribution.
You are welcome.[✘]
[✘]
[✘]
[✘]
That's a thought...
[✘]
What about him doing his job is objectionable to you? Be specific.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're not trying to liken people who work at health insurers with slavers.
Still, you obviously have a moral objection to this man's occupation. What is that, specifically?
I'm saying we live in a democracy. If we want different rules, we can make them. Is UHC in violation of insurance regulations?
Do you have specific examples? The ones that come to my mind are just further examples of government trying to insert ideology above reality.
I don't think you would like that plan. It would undoubtedly involve accountability measures on patients to which I suspect you would object.
[✘]
[✘]
Who did that? Where?
Another article, from a man whom I respect greatly:
If I Had A Rocket Launcher by Fred Clark
Here comes UnitedHealthcare
Second time today …
News item: "Police hunt for UnitedHealthcare CEO's masked killer after 'brazen, targeted' attack on NYC street."
No one — not police, not reporters, not the general public — heard about this crime and wondered "Why would anyone want to hurt this man?"
UnitedHealthcare is one of the largest providers of private health insurance in America. It is also notorious for denying coverage — and thereby denying healthcare, denying health, denying care. So much that it stands out among its peers in the uniquely American terrible idea of a for-profit health insurance industry.
Literally millions of Americans know or love someone whose health, wellbeing and livelihood has been harmed by UnitedHealthcare. And nearly everyone in this country has some firsthand experience with their own physical and financial health being threatened or damaged or delayed by this system in general. UnitedHealthcare represents that system. If it had a face, it would be the face of the CEO of that company.
So if the suspect list for this crime is to include everyone with a motive, then there are, roughly, 335 million suspects.
Everyone assumed that was what this must be about. Almost instantly and automatically. Sure, it was possible this "brazen, targeted attack" was prompted by something else — by any of the reasons that anybody ever shoots anybody else here in gun-loving America. Maybe it involved romantic betrayal or high-finance rivalries or some inheritance dispute? That was possible, but we all understood, right away, that it was unlikely in this case. When a for-profit health insurance executive gets shot on the street, it's not hard to imagine why.
That universal suspicion seems to have been confirmed by evidence left behind by the shooter — shell casings bearing the words "deny," "defend," and "depose." That echoes the title of Jay M. Feinman's book Delay, Deny, Defend: Why Insurance Companies Don't Pay Claims and What You Can Do About It . (I have not read this book but, as I understand it, Feinman's advice on "what you can do about it" does not recommend lethal violence.)
But we didn't need that hint from the perpetrator to understand what just happened: One of the millions of people harmed by this guy — or by this guy's company, or by the industry this guy represents — got pushed past the breaking point. Given the impotence or corrupt complicity of every "proper channel" for seeking redress or justice or restoration here, it's hardly surprising to see someone resort to other means.
Hence the strange spectacle of the Associated Press's "Live Updates" breaking-news page on this story. The top headline is "Police search for suspect continues," but the reporting here ranges far afield from the usual "manhunt for killer" coverage. It includes headlines like "UnitedHealthcare's history of claim denials" and "What is the criticism of insurers?" and "Anger and vitriol against health insurers filled social media in the wake of Thompson's killing."
You don't need to approve of vigilante violence to understand all of that, or even to feel more sympathy for the criminal here than for the massively harmful, perfectly legal predatory billionaire he targeted.
Marisa Kabas has some thoughtful reflections on the public reaction to Thompson's death, comparing that reaction to the gleeful celebration of the death of Henry Kissinger. The usual norms or mannered propriety that shapes how we respond to the death of others, she notes, don't apply to those deemed to have "violated the human contract." The anger and vitriol and schadenfreude are, in other words, reciprocal , which is to say, fair.
All of this discussion — and the discussion of this discussion — has me thinking back to Bruce Cockburn's classic song "If I Had a Rocket Launcher."
That song prompted a great deal of fretful, hand-wringing, thumb-sucking, navel-gazing, bodypart-gerund discourse about the propriety of advocating violence. Most of that came from people who never listened to the song or, perhaps, just couldn't get past the title.
The song was not a call to supply rocket launchers to the victims of government death squads. It was a call to stop those death squads from killing everybody unable to defend themselves with heavy firepower. Cockburn isn't advocating or even endorsing violent justice in opposition to violent injustice, he's just saying he understands it.
That's true for most people. The more deeply and intimately you understand violent injustice, the more deeply and intimately — and viscerally — you can appreciate the desire for violent justice. It's apocalyptic, in the original, biblical sense. It's "the horse and rider are hurled into the sea."
You can't live like Pharaoh — enriching yourself by oppressing everyone else — and expect people to respond to your death as though you weren't Pharaoh. When Pharaohs die, the people sing.
I for one had an immediate alternative: someone one the Board who didn't like this guys policies.
People who deal in death for a living probably think about killing their adversaries all the time.
Not everyone can be covered for everything, that's not how insurance works in the real world. There has to be limits as to who is covered and to what extent. Some people seem to have a serious problem with the level of compensation that some CEOs receive
Let's compare the leader of a country to the leader of a corporation. He would essentially be a national CEO....right?
His actions or the lack of them have caused many deaths, much misery, pain, and suffering in that country. Should he meet the same fate as Mr. Thompson?
FWIW, I have Medicare Advantage as administered by UHC and have been very satisfied with the treatment and benefits I have received. Is the government involved in formulating the qualifications? Would we be better off if the government administered our healthcare instead of a private, for profit, company?
[✘]
Do you recognize that insurance companies routinely exploit their advantages over customers? That they are driven to deny claims on technicalities and charge excessive prices with the approval of the federal government thanks to long-term, continuous lobbying? That they are incredibly profitable in result?
While killing a CEO is NOT what should be done, it is rather easy to see what might motivate a less-than-stable individual who just got fucked by an insurance company (e.g. denial of cancer treatment claims) to turn to such violence. Do you see that?
UHC has been in trouble more than once for denying all claims the first time they were processed. Claims processors were told to hold off until they came through a second and 3rd time.
Insurance companies are NOT in the business of covering medical/property claims. Their primary business is to collect monthly premiums and invest that money for stockholders.
Charge excessive prices??? Retired in 2015 from civil service - cardiac arrest - insurance premiums, while working, $612.00. For 2025, my premiums are "supposed" to go up to $936.00 per month - for just my wife and I.
Yeah - tad bit excessive.
Hard to tell from your comment. Are you trying to say you agree that insurance companies try to charge excessive prices or are you disagreeing?
Are you saying that health insurance companies' charges are excessive? Based on what?
Perhaps if you could give some credible references instead of rants about who is denied coverage and why it would easier to agree with you.
My Medicare premium went a few bucks for next year, it now will be about $50 a month, ER visit went from $90 to $135. Office visits are $0, specialists went to $35 from $25. My hospital bill for being in the hospital 8 days with Covid four years ago came close to $100,000. I paid only the $90 copay. I've been very pleased with my Medicare Advantage plan
What did your cardiac arrest cost?
The average healthcare expenditure in the US is just under $14k/per person per year. At $936, you're paying far less than half of that.
Insurance is excessive because the cost of care is excessive.
Source?
Seems incredibly odd now that the Affordable Care Act ties profits to claims paid.
One time occurrence and after paying into and having not used my coverage for 30 years, not bothered.
But, my concern is now, for just my wife and I, our monthly premium is scheduled to be $936.00 beginning 01/01/25. I live on an OPM retirement plan (FERS) of 1/3 my high three salary, so this premium adjustment will take 36% of my retirement income.
That is bothersome.
(Hands had to be wrapped 'cause I kept pulling tubes out while in 26 day medically induced coma.)
There are multiple sources online right now...
There have been multiple lawsuits over the years for this particular company using mass denial strategies. And it's no secret they have the highest denial rate in the industry.
Well, as Mr. Thompson would say, FUCK YOU.
Thank United!
I wonder if these people who had all these nice things to say about him ever talkied to any of the tens of thousands of people or family members that he gladly fucked over and left homeless or dead.
How many tears did he shed over the cancer patients that could have lived but didnt because he ordered his employees to deny them coverage?
Fuck him, he got off easy given the misery he intentionally put others through.
karma ...
It appears that many would prefer that the government take over healthcare, or single payer. The very first step would be to cut costs and benefits....to essentially ration care.
Why? If there are no shareholders or zillionaire CEOs skimming money from the insurance fund, there would be more money for the insured - you know, the sick people who need help.
Theoretically, you know... a healthcare system exists to ensure the people‘s health, not to further enrich the already rich.
Right? Just imagine if the people who administered healthcare in this country only got paid what a regular civil servant gets paid.
The French pay a little over half what Americans pay, for healthcare that's superior. That system is administered by people paid like civil servants. (It's a separate administration, but pay is similar.)
Maybe the absence of CEO pay and shareholder dividends has something to do with better performance for lower cost?
Maybe. It's not that simple.
Our government run programs lose anywhere from 10-25% of total expenditure in claims that shouldn't have been paid (their own data) which is more in actual dollars than the profits of the top 10 health insurers combined. Our government programs are not administered by civil servants, BTW. It's mostly outsourced.
There are a number of other variables that affect the comparison.
The French negotiate drug prices. We don't.
French docs make about 1/3 of what US docs make.
French people eat fresh food, walk more than drive, and have relatively low stress.
Americans have terrible diets, are famously obese, sedentary, and unhealthy in a dozen other ways. The US spends nearly as much on obesity related illnesses as France does on their total system.
So if the conversation is about "are French people healthier", the answer is "in most cases, absolutely so". If the question is about "is the French healthcare system better", it's more difficult to assess because they don't deal with 3/4 of what the American system has to deal with.
???
About the only big difference would be firearm injuries and deaths.
Diseases are the same.
Obesity is probably worse in the States, but it's bad in France, too.
Diet is probably better in France... largely because ultra-processed foods don't have much place. Americans don't really know what they eat, and with mounting pressure to eliminate regulations, this will probably get worse.
That too, yeah.
Obesity rates in France are in the mid teens. We're over 40%.
Exactly.
But it's not just that. French people walk. Or cycle. Americans will drive a quarter mile.
Here's the best example I can think of.... about 92% of golf rounds in Europe are people who walk the course. In America, almost 60% of golf rounds are in a riding cart.
We have other issues that I don't think most people know, and I'm not sure if you've seen them in France or not. About 40% of prescriptions written in America never get filled. In most European countries where I've traveled, the pharmacist can prescribe medication. Is that still the case if France? We don't allow that here, as I'm sure you know. It's a massive cost and time savings.
I was in Strasbourg about 8 years ago. My hayfever kicked off, and I was miserable. I walked into the pharmacie, got 5 days worth of Actifed, and went on with my trip. I paid about 10 euro, which is about what it would cost here, but I didn't have to take 2 hours out of my day and spend $50 for a doctor visit. It was brilliant.
They often have no choice. American (and Canadian) zoning laws don't allow mixed usage, so where there's housing there's no commerce. It's crazy.
If you're interested in the implications and consequences of zoning, there‘s an excellent YouTube channel called "Not Just Bikes" run by a Canadian who now lives in the Netherlands.
French pharmacies can't write prescriptions. I'm not sure but it seems to me that "over the counter" is more open in the US.
We live about twenty minutes from a Mexican town serving Americans' medical needs - dental, ophthalmological, pharmaceutical. Prescriptions are not required for anything.
They often do, though.
That's a fair point. I will say that's changed substantially in the last 10-15 years or so.
Drug overdose death in the US were a bit over 107,000 in 2023 I would suspect that they have a direct effect on our life expectancy stats.
In some places. Another good YouTube channel is CityNerd. Ray Delahanty talks mainly about transit systems, and also visits cities and neighborhoods in cities. He confirms what you say... sometimes. Our son lives in Houston, so we stop over coming and going to Yuma. My only knowledge of Houston was the zillion-lane highways between the airport and our son's house. Delahanty visited a number of diverse neighborhoods,. giving a completely different image of the city.
Delahanty‘s criticism of cities like Houston is that while there are indeed some nice neighborhoods, there's rarely any good connective tissue linking them.
Here in Yuma, housing is going up like weeds. Cookie-cutter, single-family, tiny lots, no commerce. Grass everywhere, with water scarcer and scarcer. Development like this is a short-term advantage for the county, with new taxes, and a long-term disaster with constantly rising infrastructure maintenance costs.
Houston is an almost unique example of how to grow a gargantuan city with virtually no planning whatsoever. It is urban sprawl at it's worst.
Dallas has that, too, but has been cultivating trendy, walkable neighborhoods for 10 years or so. The big complaint is gentrification, but I'm not sure there is a lot they can do about that.
sounds reasonable.
I'd be curious how that math actually works out. Does it reduce average life expectancy by days? Weeks? It would be interesting to know.
According to John Hopkins study it cuts off 8 months from birth.
That literally happens now with private insurance.
Are you high? You are describing our current system.
Couldn't ber worse than wehat we have.
if it wasn't for democrat inspired healthcare programs benefiting veterans and the elderly in the last 60+ years, chances are good that you'd already be in a box ...