Who, exactly, on this website or anywhere, has said that health insurance workers are the enemy.

I've seen posts saying that the insurance industry is a black hole of greed inflicting pain on innocent people.

I've seen posts saying that insurance executives who dispassionately set a policy of denying claims as an automatic first response are evil.

I have not seen anyone saying that claims adjusters are evil. They're cogs in the machine. You were obviously a good and helpful and earnest and honest cog. Not all are.

But to try to make this about the front line workers is, frankly, disingenuous.

Health Insurance Workers Fearful Amid Public Anger After Slaying of C.E.O. (HAHA! GOOD!!)

https://democraticunderground.com/100219815361

Can you find some line workers who are, reasonably or not, afraid? Bet you can!

Can you find Americans who believe just about any random bullshit? You can for sure!

I mean, I realize that the NYT is totally straight news without the slightest bias. Certainly not pro-corporate bias. But I'm just not sure that finding a couple of people who say they're scared constitutes the authoritative conclusion of the matter.

Your mileage, clearly, differs.

You are aware, I trust, that there are many people in America who are afraid to go to the hospital for fear of ending up bankrupt. But--what?--that's just good business?

On edit: what does that thread prove about what's being said on this website? That was your original subject line.

I'm not sure I even know what a podcaster is.

The point, which I bet you actually get, is not whether the NYT is reliable.

It is that citing a couple of people who report being terrorized does not, in any world, constitute proof, or even evidence, that people are calling for the murder of front line workers.

You're smart. You know that.

That they do not consider workers at these companies innocents.

Workers, not CEOs. Not decision makers. Not policy makers. Workers.

And in an atmosphere where people clearly hope for more violence (don't bother denying this one - it would insult both our intelligences), what does it mean when people start parsing who is innocent and who is not?

That's the problem wandering this world without a compass and relying on whatever seems like a good idea at the time. People often find themselves arriving at strange, undesirable places.

Broad brushes and confidently stated assertions are really great. I think we both agree on that.

Especially when they're often so confidently incorrect.

"And in an atmosphere where people clearly hope for more violence (don't bother denying this one - it would insult both our intelligences)..."

Unless I'm mistaken, the hope you are referring to is the hope that the violence commited against patients by the insurance industry can be REDUCED.

And a brain to understand the context and intent behind them.

It serves zero purpose to deny these sentiments are floating around. Why bother? I don't get it. Who is the denial for? It can't be for me. And everyone else already has their own thoughts on these things. Is there an invisible audience involved I am unaware of? Is it an attempt at gaslighting posterity?

"No one did what they were obviously doing."

K.

But again, I believe the calls that are being made are for the reduction in harm to patients needing care.

Literally none of it.

...in which I responded to your post # 12, correct?

is what Luigi should have done if he just had to hurt this guy.

"When has anyone needed proof in politics."

I honestly can't make a lick of sense of that.

You offered an NYT article with some anecdotes as evidence in support of your assertions.

Why'd you bother with that if no one needs proof in politics.

I'm not sure, actually, that this is politics. If I take you and a number of others at their words, this is not a matter of politics. It's a matter of life and death for thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, of people.

Wanna back that simple statement up with some stats, even a podcast?

So terribly sorry for accusing you of citing the NYT.

Another poster in this thread linked to a DU thread that was based on an NYT article. I responded to that and you responded to my post. Mea maxima culpa for wrongly thinking that you would rely on the NYT.

As for the thousands or hundreds of thousands, if you read carefully, I was referring to the insurance company employees about whom you are concerned. I'm sure there are thousands of them right now, let alone over the centuries, and I'd be startled if there were not hundreds of thousands. But, as to the latter, I could be overestimating it.

I'm sorry that this source is not a podcast, as you seem to be fixated on getting information from them, but here's a reasonably reliable website that says that the current number of employees in the life, health, and medical industries is about 910,000, which, I submit, qualifies as both thousands and hundreds of thousands. Those are the people who you claim are at risk.

I'm pretty sure that there are fewer than 700,000 of 900,000 employees in the life insurance biz, so I'm confident that "hundreds of thousands" is an apt characterization of the number of threatened health insurance workers.

That's a line I've seen a couple times here recently, on conversations about this case.

I view the case and response in the context of class warfare, rather than politics.

The people who want maximum profits on their investments?

they’ve gotten their business for next six months at least.

I think they need to come out strong with some real changes. At least I hope so. Because we are stuck with them until Congress gets off its rear.

Also, I saw a November notice that CMS is going to analyze denials for Med Adv and ACA plans.

I know people are upset with health insurance decision-makers, but have people started speaking about health insurance workers now too?

She will probably have her charges dropped.

Oh...that's right. Can't do callouts. So convenient.

But hyperbole is good for some, impermissible for others. Right?

But it is possible I missed it. I'd think that's something the maga cult would be advocating, not Democrats.

I'm 100% sure he'd be a better pick than RFK, Jr.


, sorta.

Nor should they be working in conditions where they are afraid.

And yet school children face the fear of gun violence every day for decades.

Gun killings are nothing new, and nothing has ever been done to reduce that problem. School children and staff have been living with this fear for decades.

So if claims adjusters are the new group who are targetted, that's sad, but my attitude as a person who worked in schools is, "Welcome to this very sad club, and good luck with that."

And if you're a gunner, a lot of this is on you. You and your gunner friends should do something about it. Because your group might be next.

Which includes every single employee from the janitor to the CEO.
Guess what? When they were arresting people that worked at the concentration camps, it didn't matter if you were a just a guard or a secretary, you still participated in the murder of millions.

I don't see it any different here. You work for an organization that refused to pay for the care of my child. It wasn't the CEO I was talking with but customer service person or whoever they were that told me the claim was denied and that was never going to change.
They don't get absolved from guilt just because they are a low level worker. They still directly benefit from that system.

Not a lot of people are in a position to pick and choose who they will work for depending on the details of that company's unpublished policies.

It's a choice.
I worked for a defense contractor for several years and it always ate at me a little. I worked at a place that built shit that killed people.
So I changed my circumstances.
I went to work for state government. I worked in wildfire suppression for 10 years and now work for my state EPA. In a blue state obviously.
My work helps people. It helps improve and protect the world we live in. My role is small but it's for the greater good. It was truly redeeming for me. These people are choosing to harm others and rationalize it as "just the job". Fuck that.
Their job harms and even kills people. People that could otherwise live happy and productive lives if they just had access to the healthcare they needed.

I spent the first two years of my adult life homeless and eating out of a dumpster.
Before I got married, I moved to a completely new place, barely a thing to my name, I had 6 months to find a place for my new spouse to live. I worked three jobs, no car, I walked or took public transportation everywhere. My work day began at 4am and ended at 1am the next day. I walked so much I was pulling bloody socks off my feet almost every night. I walked so much my shoes literally came apart one night walking home.
Fast forward a little more and I left that defense contractor to move to a state I had never been to before and knew no one that lived there.
Month after I started working there I went to my first wildfire. Within a couple years I was driving forest roads and looking at fire in every direction. I was in way over my head and way out of my comfort zone. But I made it work and I got very good at what I do.

So don't tell me what choices people have. I know exactly how hard it is. Because I've made those choices.
Working for a soul-sucking murder machine is a choice. No one is forcing anybody to work there.

...more in line with your principles.

Most people never get an opportunity like that.

yes indeed

equating workers at insurance companies with concentration camp guards. There have been implicit, and explicit, calls for more killing.

Somedays I wonder if we have truly lost.