4 ms·

I recognize a distinction between a premeditated direct intent to kill someone, and whatever it was this guy did. If you have different values then you might no

by defen 2y ago

I recognize a distinction between a premeditated direct intent to kill someone, and whatever it was this guy did. If you have different values then you might not.

DrillShopper 2y ago
I do recognize a distinction as well - what this guy did was worse. Don't get my wrong, shooting someone in broad daylight is a bad thing and I will agree that we shouldn't encourage it. In this case I don't have any sympathy for the victim. There's a difference there - I recognize that the assassin is wrong but that's orthogonal to my sympathy (or in this case, lack of) for the victim. What the CEO did was worse. While someone who premeditates a murder clearly has knowledge of and familiarity with the person being murdered the CEO does not have that for the deaths that are a result of denying care. They feel almost clinical to him, numbers on a balance sheet to be weighed against the bottom line. It's textbook banality of evil - the deaths he was responsible for were just the cost of doing business, and what a business it is.
- defen 2y ago
  The "banality of evil" was originally used to describe the bureaucrats who enabled the mass-murder of Holocaust victims (Godwin's law strikes again!). Their actual goal, the primary outcome they were trying to maximize, was murdering Jewish people and other "undesirables". I don't think this guy was trying to do anything on that level. I don't think he sat down every day and said "how do we kill more people?" Rather, he was working within a really bad system that has bad incentives and no one knows how to fix it.
  - DrillShopper 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - defen 2y ago
      Was this guy uniquely evil, as far as health care executives go? Like...if more of them get murdered, will you just shrug and say "yeah they kinda had it coming"?
      - vundercind 2y ago
        > Was this guy uniquely evil, as far as health care executives go? I think if you poll the people taking this as a good thing, you will get an overwhelming answer of “probably not”, and the implications are exactly what you suppose.
      - drewbug01 2y ago
        There’s an awful lot of wiggle room in the “more of them” phrase, so I suppose the only realistic answer is “it depends.” But speaking more generally - I think a lot of people would, indeed, shrug. The US healthcare system is one of the most miserable parts of living in this country and virtually everyone has had to deal with it at some point. And whether or not they deserve the direct blame, insurance execs (and pharma execs, etc) directly profit from that misery. I think a lot of people are not going to shed a single tear over events like this.

by defen 2y ago

I recognize a distinction between a premeditated direct intent to kill someone, and whatever it was this guy did. If you have different values then you might not.

DrillShopper 2y ago

I do recognize a distinction as well - what this guy did was worse. Don't get my wrong, shooting someone in broad daylight is a bad thing and I will agree that we shouldn't encourage it. In this case I don't have any sympathy for the victim. There's a difference there - I recognize that the assassin is wrong but that's orthogonal to my sympathy (or in this case, lack of) for the victim. What the CEO did was worse. While someone who premeditates a murder clearly has knowledge of and familiarity with the person being murdered the CEO does not have that for the deaths that are a result of denying care. They feel almost clinical to him, numbers on a balance sheet to be weighed against the bottom line. It's textbook banality of evil - the deaths he was responsible for were just the cost of doing business, and what a business it is.

defen 2y ago
The "banality of evil" was originally used to describe the bureaucrats who enabled the mass-murder of Holocaust victims (Godwin's law strikes again!). Their actual goal, the primary outcome they were trying to maximize, was murdering Jewish people and other "undesirables". I don't think this guy was trying to do anything on that level. I don't think he sat down every day and said "how do we kill more people?" Rather, he was working within a really bad system that has bad incentives and no one knows how to fix it.
- DrillShopper 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - defen 2y ago
    Was this guy uniquely evil, as far as health care executives go? Like...if more of them get murdered, will you just shrug and say "yeah they kinda had it coming"?
    - vundercind 2y ago
      > Was this guy uniquely evil, as far as health care executives go? I think if you poll the people taking this as a good thing, you will get an overwhelming answer of “probably not”, and the implications are exactly what you suppose.
    - drewbug01 2y ago
      There’s an awful lot of wiggle room in the “more of them” phrase, so I suppose the only realistic answer is “it depends.” But speaking more generally - I think a lot of people would, indeed, shrug. The US healthcare system is one of the most miserable parts of living in this country and virtually everyone has had to deal with it at some point. And whether or not they deserve the direct blame, insurance execs (and pharma execs, etc) directly profit from that misery. I think a lot of people are not going to shed a single tear over events like this.