▲ 1059 ▼ BlackRock is Suing UnitedHealth for Giving “Too Much Care” to Patients After the CEO was Murdered (medium.com) submitted 1 year ago by CowsLookLikeMaps@sh.itjust.works to c/aboringdystopia@lemmy.world 123 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 year ago (3 children) Investments are supposed to be a gamble. Imagine losing at the casino and then suing the casino because you didn't get the advertised jackpot. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] leftytighty@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago (1 child) This is unfortunately true, they'll likely win the case on that angle. My point is that legislation shouldn't guarantee earnings from gambling under unforeseen circumstances. That's just gambling. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Seriously, how many times have I heard the argument that CEOs should be making "the big bucks" because they're taking on "the big risks"? Yet except for Brian Thompson, I can't think of any CEOs who've ever actually incurred risks from their "gambles." They always seem to make cuts to everyone and everything else before accepting a loss, or else jump ship with a golden parachute (and probably go on to fuck up a different company afterwards.) Of course, I can't deny the possibility that CEOs who fail don't make the news, and this is just survivorship bias (no pun intended.) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sneptaur@pawb.social 2 points 1 year ago The CEOs aren't making any risks at all, it's the shareholders taking risks. The unfairness comes in when the government protects them from their own risk while leaving the poor out to rot. permalink fedilink source parent [–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago This isn't about a failed bet. It's about investors not being informed of the changes. It's closer to having the odds and rules explained, then having the casino change both retroactively after they've taken your money. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Sneptaur@pawb.social 1 point 1 year ago That's the problem with our entire system! permalink fedilink source parent
[+] leftytighty@slrpnk.net 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago (1 child) This is unfortunately true, they'll likely win the case on that angle. My point is that legislation shouldn't guarantee earnings from gambling under unforeseen circumstances. That's just gambling. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Seriously, how many times have I heard the argument that CEOs should be making "the big bucks" because they're taking on "the big risks"? Yet except for Brian Thompson, I can't think of any CEOs who've ever actually incurred risks from their "gambles." They always seem to make cuts to everyone and everything else before accepting a loss, or else jump ship with a golden parachute (and probably go on to fuck up a different company afterwards.) Of course, I can't deny the possibility that CEOs who fail don't make the news, and this is just survivorship bias (no pun intended.) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sneptaur@pawb.social 2 points 1 year ago The CEOs aren't making any risks at all, it's the shareholders taking risks. The unfairness comes in when the government protects them from their own risk while leaving the poor out to rot. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago (1 child) This is unfortunately true, they'll likely win the case on that angle. My point is that legislation shouldn't guarantee earnings from gambling under unforeseen circumstances. That's just gambling. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Seriously, how many times have I heard the argument that CEOs should be making "the big bucks" because they're taking on "the big risks"? Yet except for Brian Thompson, I can't think of any CEOs who've ever actually incurred risks from their "gambles." They always seem to make cuts to everyone and everything else before accepting a loss, or else jump ship with a golden parachute (and probably go on to fuck up a different company afterwards.) Of course, I can't deny the possibility that CEOs who fail don't make the news, and this is just survivorship bias (no pun intended.) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sneptaur@pawb.social 2 points 1 year ago The CEOs aren't making any risks at all, it's the shareholders taking risks. The unfairness comes in when the government protects them from their own risk while leaving the poor out to rot. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 child) Seriously, how many times have I heard the argument that CEOs should be making "the big bucks" because they're taking on "the big risks"? Yet except for Brian Thompson, I can't think of any CEOs who've ever actually incurred risks from their "gambles." They always seem to make cuts to everyone and everything else before accepting a loss, or else jump ship with a golden parachute (and probably go on to fuck up a different company afterwards.) Of course, I can't deny the possibility that CEOs who fail don't make the news, and this is just survivorship bias (no pun intended.) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Sneptaur@pawb.social 2 points 1 year ago The CEOs aren't making any risks at all, it's the shareholders taking risks. The unfairness comes in when the government protects them from their own risk while leaving the poor out to rot. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Sneptaur@pawb.social 2 points 1 year ago The CEOs aren't making any risks at all, it's the shareholders taking risks. The unfairness comes in when the government protects them from their own risk while leaving the poor out to rot. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago This isn't about a failed bet. It's about investors not being informed of the changes. It's closer to having the odds and rules explained, then having the casino change both retroactively after they've taken your money. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Sneptaur@pawb.social 1 point 1 year ago That's the problem with our entire system! permalink fedilink source parent