Connor Gaydos, a man connected with a satirical project on the relaunch of the energy company Enron, was hit in the face with a pie in New York City on Thursday. A video of the moment surfaced where the 28-year-old is seen entering a building in New York City before a person threw a pie at his face. The video quickly went viral on social media., US News News - Times Now
I keep saying this- you cannot assassinate your way into companies putting people over profits. They’re legally required to do the opposite.
UHC rates will continue to rise and they will continue to deny people. CEOs are just as replaceable as every other employee in a corporation.
So you might as well throw pies in their faces and laugh at them because this is not how you solve systemic issues.
And I assume a bunch of you will be pissed off at me for saying so again, but you’ll be in for a rude awakening when your insurance premium goes up and Trump decides to bring back denying for pre-existing conditions.
You have no idea whether or not it was the assassination that changed that policy and I continue to maintain that you cannot solve a systemic problem with vigilantism.
How many CEO assassinations do you think it will take for the fully Republican-controlled legislative, executive and judicial branch to socialize the U.S. for-profit medical industry? You don’t need to give me an exact number, just an estimate.
When Shinzo Abe was assassinated, most of Tetsuya Yamagami’s concerns were directly addressed in policy, including the dissolution of the church he was protesting.
And yet you cannot disprove a direct correlation between the two events, so, until we won’t have a bigger dataset to analyse, both our opinions are equally valid; even if a policy change in the time span of a day and against the economic interests of this institution would skewer the hypothesis towards my interpretation rather than yours, but I want to give you the benefit of the doubt. Hopefully we’ll have this increased dataset available in a short time ;)
To answer your question: more or less all of them. Or at least a great majority (70-80% at least), all of the people who you cited in your list are out for blood against the lower classes so I don’t see anything wrong in defending ourselves from these beasts.
They’ll have to be successful 100% of the times to avoid being killed, we will need just one successful try to reach our goal
Purely performative. Got it.
The UK has a long tradition of pieing awful politicians - and guess what? It gets a laugh and memable pictures, but changes nothing.
John Prescott looked like he deserved it xD
UHC CEO gets assassinated. Policies unchanged.
I keep saying this- you cannot assassinate your way into companies putting people over profits. They’re legally required to do the opposite.
UHC rates will continue to rise and they will continue to deny people. CEOs are just as replaceable as every other employee in a corporation.
So you might as well throw pies in their faces and laugh at them because this is not how you solve systemic issues.
And I assume a bunch of you will be pissed off at me for saying so again, but you’ll be in for a rude awakening when your insurance premium goes up and Trump decides to bring back denying for pre-existing conditions.
Blue shield policy on anesthesia was changed the day after the assassination.
Policies have been changed and no pie was involved
You have no idea whether or not it was the assassination that changed that policy and I continue to maintain that you cannot solve a systemic problem with vigilantism.
How many CEO assassinations do you think it will take for the fully Republican-controlled legislative, executive and judicial branch to socialize the U.S. for-profit medical industry? You don’t need to give me an exact number, just an estimate.
When Shinzo Abe was assassinated, most of Tetsuya Yamagami’s concerns were directly addressed in policy, including the dissolution of the church he was protesting.
You’re living in a pipe dream if you think that a fascist oligarchy gives a shit about anything but making money.
And yet you cannot disprove a direct correlation between the two events, so, until we won’t have a bigger dataset to analyse, both our opinions are equally valid; even if a policy change in the time span of a day and against the economic interests of this institution would skewer the hypothesis towards my interpretation rather than yours, but I want to give you the benefit of the doubt. Hopefully we’ll have this increased dataset available in a short time ;)
To answer your question: more or less all of them. Or at least a great majority (70-80% at least), all of the people who you cited in your list are out for blood against the lower classes so I don’t see anything wrong in defending ourselves from these beasts.
They’ll have to be successful 100% of the times to avoid being killed, we will need just one successful try to reach our goal