this post was submitted on 25 May 2025
235 points (99.6% liked)

Progressive Politics

2637 readers
368 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] axEl7fB5@lemmy.cafe 6 points 4 hours ago

Now we need Mario

[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 1 points 4 hours ago

I’ve been skeptical about the argument that UHC made major changes to be more pro-consumer after the shooting. So I am very curious what the case is based on here.

Honestly, I thought the first lawsuit was a publicity stunt but blackrock doesn’t seem like the type, so maybe there is something to this.

[–] Hikermick@lemmy.world 99 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

If there was ever an argument for national health-care this is it

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 31 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

We support it, at least in theory.

The problem is 99% of voters support Republicans and Democrats, and both of those parties oppose universal health care.

[–] Hikermick@lemmy.world 7 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Well one of those parties expands Medicaid, the other reveals it

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago

It is infuriating watching Democrats say they support something but then working against it behind the scenes. I agree.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago

I wouldn't say support when we only have two choices. I'm liberal and loathe the Democrats. And listen to conservatives, they don't use the word Republican any longer, they just say "conservative values". As with liberals, they know their party doesn't represent what it says it represents.

[–] AmazingAwesomator@lemmy.world 55 points 13 hours ago

so you're saying it worked.....

[–] CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world 73 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Anyone happen to have the names of the c suite at Blackrock? For research purposes.

[–] known_unknown@lemmy.world 40 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

fink /fiNGk/ DEROGATORY•INFORMAL noun an unpleasant or contemptible person

Anyway,

https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/about-us/leadership

[–] nokturne213@sopuli.xyz 30 points 13 hours ago

An archive link in case they decide to take it down. https://archive.is/uK6om

[–] SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world 10 points 13 hours ago

Yeah, hard to imagine a more apropos name for sometime at the top of such a scummy operation.

[–] known_unknown@lemmy.world 52 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Oh, so BlackRock needs to be the next target?

[–] SanctimoniousApe@lemmings.world 19 points 13 hours ago

The reason they gave for suing UHC certainly would seem like that's what their lawyers are requesting.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 12 hours ago

Someone is paying attention. ^^

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 49 points 14 hours ago

The System Working Exactly as Designed This isn’t a bug in American healthcare — it’s a feature. BlackRock’s massive influence helped shape UnitedHealth into the claim-denial machine it became. They voted on executive compensation packages that rewarded denying care. They approved strategies that prioritized shareholder returns over patient outcomes. But when public outrage threatens that business model, they don’t pivot to supporting better healthcare. They sue to protect their right to profit from human suffering. The Punchline That Isn’t Funny BlackRock will probably win this lawsuit. Or settle for millions. Either way, they’ll extract value from a system designed to extract life from patients. They’re not just suing UnitedHealth — they’re suing the very idea that health insurance should provide health insurance. They’re fighting for their constitutional right to profit when people die and lose money when people live. Welcome to American healthcare, where caring too much is a lawsuit waiting to happen.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

Look, if someone is sick and it's anything above a scraped knee, the science says you shoot them in the head. I don't know how else you can run a profitable healthcare company. /s

[–] CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

False. The cost of bullets brings down profits. Just throw them in a ditch. As long as there’s no transport cost, of course.

Edit: I forgot to add, make sure the guy throwing them in the ditch isn't getting any overtime.

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 4 points 12 hours ago

~Cave Johnson

[–] blakenong@lemmings.world 8 points 12 hours ago

Luigi Larry Fink

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 4 points 12 hours ago

https://archive.ph/mwTU1

This piece does beat the dead whale a bit, but it's interesting the first time around.