You must log in or register to comment.
Guess your lot didn’t read the Beveridge Report: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beveridge_Report
I’d say you’d be better off putting away money in a savings account for medical bills, but I’ve heard stuff that makes me suspect the insurance companies already shut off that avenue (e.g. prescription meds cost way more off prescription).
luigi hasn’t been found guilty so anything that refers to a shooting is supposition at best
They approved a friends expensive drug therapy around that same time. It didn’t save his life but it definitely prolongs and improved it. The thing is these Cluster B nightmares that make statements like that can only see it if its them who needs the saving. Otherwise they are cold blooded death mongers.
@ByteOnBikes Alt :
A post bluesky sharing another post :
Niaouro (Nia) Psaka @niapsaka.bsky.social“Can you name a person saved by Luigi Mangione?” Apparently, Yes.
The other post :
My fiancee: The tumor in her brain would be virtually impossible for us to pay for but the timing of the murder caused so many insurance companies to panic and briefly accept claims they normally would have fought. She was in blinding and immeasurable pain, and today she’s fine.“we need Robin hood”
“For what?”
“Financial stuff, you wouldn’t understand but you should buy it”
Robin Hood shows up.
“Oh fuck. Do you think he knows we were lying? He wasn’t supposed to actually show up. Do you think he’ll shoot us?”
“He’s kind of famous for it. Like legendary famous. You probably should have referenced King Midas if you were going to misinterpret a myth”
Would this mean that even if insurance companies were not corrupt, killing their CEOs would still save lives on net? Exercise for the reader.
Trolly problem IRL
GLORY AND HONOUR TO MANGIONE!
Ah yes, the end all argument: annecdotal evidence.
User asked for a “single” anecdote, user got a single anecdote. So what’s the problem?
Even the lowest claim acceptance rates were passing people at 67% according to data. Average was more like 84%. The vast majority of denied claims are never appealed. This post is about a successful appeal, or perhaps even a claim which was never denied at all, by username “24 Hour Luigi Mangione”, and user B asserts that this is proof that Luigi has saved lives answering imaginary hypothetical user A, but in fact it doesn’t prove that even a single person was saved unless it can show more people were approved than otherwise would have been.
From where I’m sitting it just looks like 2 dudes furiously masturbating each other, AKA circlejerking.
If your default assumption is that this event:
-
Did not cause an immediate “panic” reduction in insurance denials, even briefly.
-
Even if it did, that this happening did not save anyone’s life.
You are just coping because the idea of killing someone ending up saving lives makes you feel icky.
Even if this is just an anecdote, I find the contrary claim harder to believe.
IDK if the people actually denying claims were scared enough to change their behavior, well plausible enough ya
Wonder if any updated guidance went out to them at any point, written or not
My default assumption is that this is a shit argument and the people who push it are dishonest fools. There is no (2). There is no second part to this stance, you haven’t presented any evidence yet and you’re posturing as if it’s 100% true.
-
Broken image?
I can see it
Yeah, I was getting jerked around about precisely how the prescriptions got filled around the time that it happened, and there was going to be some bullshit about Blue Cross not covering the medication because it wasn’t bottled while Venus was in retrograde or what the fuck ever, and then it was magically covered. The coincidence wasn’t lost on me.
except that luigi didnt kill anyone and he’s very obviously being framed
Based on what’s leaked on how the bag, presumptuive murder weapon and evidence was handled this is completely true.
Dude was with me the whole day.
Still can’t fathom why they would go with a dude that’s the reincarnation of Ridiculously Photogenic Guy tho
deleted by creator
I see this sentiment expressed, but is there any evidence to support it? If he were really being framed, I’d expect his family, friends, lawyers, etc to be trying to spread that message as much as possible and publicly show that he couldn’t have done it. Like publicly present his alibi or something?
I have no problem with killing the CEO. Even if there were 100% irrefutable evidence Luigi did it, I’d still think Luigi was a good guy.
Why do people think he’s being framed?
The cop was rifling through his bag for a couple of minutues, closed the bag and took it away for 10m, came back, started searching the same bag again and this time managed to find a gun.
You actually have it backwards, it’s innocent until proven guilty and so far the prosecutors weren’t able to produce any usable evidence. So no one has to prove that Luigi didn’t do it just like no one has to prove you or I didn’t do it
And if I were a judge or on the jury, I’d be looking for definitive evidence. But that doesn’t really matter for the question I’m asking. Regardless whether Luigi did it or someone else did, it wouldn’t change my opinion of Luigi or the crime.
I’m not trying to adjudicate guilt or innocence here. I’m trying to find out if there’s something I’m not aware of. Has Luigi or his lawyer actually denied that Luigi did it? I know they’ve pushed back against the evidence, but have they come out and said “Luigi didn’t do it, this is where he was when it happened, this is why we know it wasn’t him?”
Fighting the evidence on procedural grounds and trying to discredit the prosecution is what a good lawyer does when they know they can’t prove their client’s innocence. They try to introduce doubt for the prosecution’s case. But if they could prove he didn’t do it, they’d just do that.
Again, I’m not trying to decide whether Luigi is a good guy or whether I should support him. If I were on the jury and Luigi got up there and swore up and down he did it and produced documentary footage of him doing it, I’d still be pushing for jury nullification. That’s not my point here. I’m trying to understand why so many people online seem so absolutely certain that this is a frameup when, as far as I can see, nobody connected to the case on the defense side is acting like it is…
Basically, right now the prosecution hasn’t actually provided any evidence that he did it. What little evidence they HAVE provided has tainted chain of custody, and was hilariously late. The defense STILL doesn’t actually have all the documentation and shit they were legally supposed to have like two months ago.
And by late, I mean that instead of giving the defense their legally required discovery documentation, the prosecution and mayor were grandstanding on TV and filming a documentary about how he ‘totally did it.’ (which is prejudicing potential juries).
They’ve also spied on his private communications with his lawyer, they never read him his miranda rights, the chain of custody of his belongings was broken (and a gun was, at minimum, planted- the gun was not in the backpack during the illegal search on scene, but the gun suddenly appeared inside the backpack at the station after chain of custody was broken.)
They’ve also changed their story several times, especially about the backpack and where it was found and what was in it. Finally, the pictures they have of the supposed shooter A: don’t actually look like Luigi Mangione to me and B: only prove that someone was at a hostel a few miles away something like two weeks before the shooting which is… utterly useless as proof.
tl;dr: People think it’s a frameup because they’ve already all but admitted to planting a gun on him, and they’ve broken basically every judicial process involved in a fair trial. The defense doesn’t want to push some parts of their argument too soon, because they need to save that for other arguments in the proceedings, not things easily disproven or discarded by less important proof. They have to play this as super carefully and by the book as possible, and that means not just shotgunning your arguments.
This is going to be as much about having the better sounding argument as it will be having the exonerating proof because of how politicized this case has become.
EDIT: I should also note- part of why the defense team isn’t trotting out all this information about where he could have been or what he might have been doing is because it straight up isn’t that part of the trial yet. As I said with the documentaries and interviews, the prosecution is doing a lot of prejudicing the jury, which should be called out by the judge, but hasn’t been. It might be that they are concerned that if they try to fight back, however, they WILL have the judge go after them for the same thing. They might also be saving and documenting all the occurrences of the prosecution doing that, in order to deliver it all at once in a massive, too-large-to-ignore package.
This is wild speculation but maybe his legal team are keeping that as an ace in the hole? The trial hasn’t even started, so why would they give the prosecution so much time to prepare for their strategy by publicly grandstanding about it?
There’s been a blatant push by media to forward the idea that Luigi did it. All they have to do is … not report evidence to the contrary. What there IS, however, is a lack of evidence that he did it, if you take into consideration the fact that NYPD - who have a history of faking evidence - probably used a gun and fake manifesto to pin the crime on him. Innocent until proven guilty has gone out the window; even news outlets aren’t bothering to hedge their language with ‘alleged’ any more.
So, just speculation? I mean, the way the media is reporting on Luigi isn’t really surprising or different than the way they report on everything.
Is there anything beyond just speculation? Any statements from friends or family? Any attempt to present an alibi where he was at the time of the killing? Any statement from his lawyers denying he did it?
Is there anything beyond just speculation?
Opportunity to plant evidence.
The defense argues that the search of Mangione’s backpack further violated his rights, arguing that there were no circumstances that constituted police conducting a warrantless search of the backpack. In the motion, Mangione’s lawyers wrote that it was only once an officer conducting the search “she had made a potentially devastating mistake by thoroughly searching the backpack of a murder suspect in a significant New York press case without a warrant, she suddenly stated that she was searching through the backpack at McDonald’s to make sure there ‘wasn’t a bomb or anything in here’.” However, Mangione’s defense team notes that the bomb squad was never called and the McDonalds was not evacuated over concerns of a bomb, but that another officer did tell the officer conducting the search that they “probably need a search warrant for it.”
Defense attorneys claim that some of the body cam footage is missing including 20 seconds of when Mangione was being questioned by a police when an officer placed his hand over his body cam and the 11 minutes during which the backpack was transferred from the McDonalds to the Altoona Police Department Precinct. The motion goes on the state that once that officer’s body cam footage resumes, it shows her immediately re-opening and closing the backpack compartments she already searched and then opening the front compartment of the backpack “as if she was specifically looking for something. Instantly, she ‘found’ a handgun in the front compartment.”
Any statements from friends or family?
Yep. Not sure what you want from that
Any attempt to present an alibi where he was at the time of the killing?
Presumably that will be during the trial.
Any statement from his lawyers denying he did it?
Plea of not guilty.
Did you miss the innocent until proven guilty and the statement that there is little to no evidence he did it. The onus is on the state to prove guilt. Not on Luigi to prove innocence. So, if you think he did it, where is the proof? Like the state isn’t coming forward with much untainted evidence and like…they really aren’t like…refuting like…the broken evidence chain and you know…they’re leaning really heavy on the media to swing popular opinion and stuff…
I’m not a judge and this isn’t a court of law. People assume guilt or innocence for themselves all the time. Obviously if I were a judge or on a jury I’d want a lot more evidence. Hell, if I were on a jury, I’d be pushing for jury nullification. I don’t see anything wrong with that CEO getting got.
Tainted evidence, media portrayal, dirty cops, this is all standard for the criminal justice system. That’s how loads of cases work, and we don’t all jump to immediately assume the state is framing every single person they accuse of anything.
My question is, if Luigi really is just some person completely unrelated to the crime who is being framed for it, why is there no pushback from him, his lawyers, or people who know him? If there were reason to believe he was being framed, with as much public support as he has, I’d assume we’d have an alibi showing where he was at the time of the shooting, or people talking about how they don’t believe he could have done it.
Everyone personally or directly connected to Luigi himself are acting exactly as I would expect them to act if he had actually done it.
I ultimately don’t really care whether or not Luigi personally was the guy who did it or not. Regardless, it wouldn’t change my opinion of Luigi or the murder. I’m just trying to find out if there’s something I haven’t heard about. Some reason or alibi or explanation to believe he’s being framed beyond “we like what he is accused of doing and he seems like a pretty good guy.”
He plead not guilty. So until the government proves otherwise we must assume that some other really cool person killed that guy.
I mean, we (the public, not the justice system) treat people who plead not guilty as if they did it all the time. How many times have we seen videos of police violence, for example, and known the guy did it regardless of what the court says?
I’m not talking about whether he should be criminally convicted. Even if he had filmed the entire thing and that was in the public, I’d still be pushing for jury nullification. That’s not my purpose here.
I’m solely trying to answer this one question:
Why do so many people seem so certain Luigi is being framed by the state when nobody connected to the defense in the case is acting like it is or have said that it is?
Guilty by vibe. Got it.
They’re using basic fucking common sense. Until we see evidence to the contrary, no, we don’t have to give in to these conspiracies that he didn’t do it. Let the court follow the law, we don’t have to when we’re forming our own opinions. How many cops have you judged guilty based on video evidence despite bad court rulings?
So you didn’t read what I wrote at all, did you?
I’m not trying to determine guilt. I’m trying to find out why so many people seem absolutely certain he was framed when nobody connected to the case on the defense side are acting like it is.
He didn’t do it, but if he’d done it: how could you tell him that he was wrong?
The Luigi Paradox: He’s not Guilty, but still a Folk Hero.
Not a paradox. He is doing two things that are absolutely worthy of respect.
Firstly he is an innocent young man who is being dragged through hell for a crime he did not commit. He is suffering unjustly for a crime he did not commit. Many people have gone through that and he deserves to be not only acquitted but so fully exonerated that the system is forced to compensate him for his unjust treatment.
Secondly, the cover provided by this case allows the real killer to remain hidden. I seriously doubt they would ever find the guy and the credibility of the prosecution would be so utterly smashed that even if they actually found the guy they might not make a move for fear of a public backlash. They might murder the guy, but that only proves they are far worse than any murderer.
So not only is Luigi innocent he is a hero, and I hope the real killer lives a long and quiet life.
They might murder the guy, but that only proves they are far worse than any murderer.
But they’d get away with it, as they always do.
Man that list would look very differently if all those assassinations of Hitler and Stalin hadn’t failed.
Yes, I noticed that progressives are far more likely to be assassinated than tyrants in modern times. Funny that.
in modern times
As opposed to the whole of human history, when oppression wasn’t a thing…?
Historically when ‘tyrants’ were killed they were usually inside jobs or by large scale political rivals.
The killing of evil powerful people by the common rabble like you and me is such a rare celestial event that the fact that we witnessed one in our lifetimes is a miracle.
Historically when ‘tyrants’ were killed they were usually inside jobs
If by “inside job” you mean “killed by people they hung around every day, some of whom were just slaves”, then yeah.
The killing of evil powerful people by the common rabble like you and me is such a rare celestial event
That’s just plain incorrect.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regicides
Read it through. A significant portion were killed by their “employees” and the people in general. Servants, captains, hell, there’s even one monarch killed by two shepherds.
Ofc kings wouldn’t walk about town like the healthcare CEO did, but the reason the royalty didn’t do that, is because unlike the CEO, the monarchs knew they’d be killed. That is unless you’re with a retinuen armored men and safe in a carriage. And only eat the leftovers from your tasters, because you’re afraid of literally every meal being poisoned by a disgruntled subject.
The new “kings” as in the capitalists, they don’t properly have this fear yet. Whoever Luigi is protecting (because there’s no evidence he did it) just reminded the “nobility” of how things used to be.
Hell, one of the first murderers in that list is a person who’s a prophet in Judaism, Christianity and Islam; Samuel.
Also, have you forgotten what the people did in France a few hundred years ago?
Basically our whole system is based on the people having taken power with a violent uprising against the evil douches.
The killing of evil powerful people by the common rabble is incredibly common throughout history.
Stop spreading apathy.
Andor | Karis Nemik’s Manifesto
There will be times when the struggle seems impossible. I know this already. Alone, unsure, dwarfed by the scale of the enemy. Remember this. Freedom is a pure idea. It occurs spontaneously and without instruction. Random acts of insurrection are occurring constantly throughout the galaxy. There are whole armies, battalions that have no idea that they’ve already enlisted in the cause. Remember that the frontier of the Rebellion is everywhere. And even the smallest act of insurrection pushes our lines forward. And then remember this. The Imperial need for control is so desperate because it is so unnatural. Tyranny requires constant effort. It breaks, it leaks. Authority is brittle. Oppression is the mask of fear. Remember that. And know this, the day will come when all these skirmishes and battles, these moments of defiance will have flooded the banks of the Empire’s authority and then there will be one too many. One single thing will break the siege. Remember this. Try.
murdering CEO’s is self defense
More accurately, Defense of Others, which is as valid as Self-Defense.
Free Luigi.
WE are Luigi. We are one.
well that’s great for this one person but this is just an anecdote, and not reliable data. we need more data points to create a large enough sample size so we can refer to more reliable statistics. i wonder how we could get that.
Gotta start somewhere on fixing the replication crisis.
That’s just responsible statistical analysis, any good scientist will tell you there should be several tests for a proper experiment.
We also haven’t seen any data compiled for health insurance claim denial rates after the killing.
not hard data but there were definitely news reports of denial rates tanking in the days following the killing.
Trading one horrible motherfucker for even one of his potential victims is absolutely enough for me. I don’t need further statistics.
No dude, they’re saying that we need to repeat the experiment
performative gasp i would never!!!
Oh yeah. Yeah! We need to robust science on this shit. The more data points we have, the more reliable the research, right? Heck yeah, let’s get on with it then!
So if you have a brain tumour they won’t pay for it? Forgive my outsider ignorance, but isn’t the entire point of medical insurance to cover situations like that?
No, the entire point of health insurance is to create profits.
That’s why our nation’s health care should be managed by an entity that does not have a profit motive, and the only entity like that is the government, which is why EVERY other country does it that way.
Well yes but actually no. The point of insurance is to pool risk so that catastrophic and unusual events don’t financially destroy people. The point of insurance companies is to make a profit and make the line go up for their shareholders. When those two goals are in conflict, the latter wins.
Speaking as a US citizen who’s dealt with insurance his whole life, it’s a giant fucking scam. It’s probably the single biggest scam in the world, and I’m honestly not sure if I’d prefer to deal with them or the IRS scammers again. At least I got the IRS scam people to break script and talk to me human to human once.
The entire point of insurance is to take your money and there is no step 2.
if the point of insurance was the public welfare, however, their interest is exclusively about profits.
they make a lot of money by denying claims and forcing costumers to fight tooth and nail to get the service they pay for.
they know lots of people will die because of denial of care, and therefore longer need healthcare. it’s so incredibly profitable to be cartoonishly evil.
You think insurance exists to serve customers? Lmao no, they exist to make their shareholders wealthy beyond imagination.
Psst … this is just an american thing. In other parts of the world, yes there are insurances that only exist to serve their customers the best way possible.
Because of those pesky commie regulations. In america, its illegal to deprive shareholders of potential profits
Seems to me like the entire point of insurance companies is to collect your money monthly in case some future event happens, then try their hardest to not actually hold up their end of the bargain if you actually need it, then raise the prices afterwards if you do get a successful claim. So you pay for them to act like they’re doing you a huge fkn favour at their personal expense and not like it’s their fkn job that you’ve been giving them money monthly for.
that’s why insurance is a scam. You pay them unfathomable amounts of money for YEARS, then you want to use it, and you have to pay more, only for them to try their fucking hardest to deny you. Usually if they do accept you, it’s already too late and you’re terminal. Insurance is a fucking scam.
All insurance is gambling. They are betting that you’ll pay thousands in home insurance or car insurance, and never make a claim, like most people. It’s a good bet for the insurance companies.
But Health Insurance is different. Unlike your house burning down or your car getting wrecked, which seldom if ever happens, EVERYBODY gets sick, and eventually dies. It’s ALWAYS a losing bet for the healthcare insurance companies. They have no choice but to rig the game so they can win.
That’s why we need to forget about Health Care INSURANCE, and think in terms of Health Care MANAGEMENT. That needs to be in the hands of an entity that isn’t motivated by profit, and that’s the government. EVERY other country in the world understands this, but America is a Ferengi nation, and we literally worship profits. And mean LITERALLY - Prosperity Doctrine is the most powerful religious philosophy in America at the moment.
Insurance should be like social security: handled by the state, with the possibility of having a complementary private insurance if you want.
Yup, that’s how it is in Australia where i live. There are lots of public hospitals that you don’t need to pay anything for if you’re a citizen, but then there’s private health insurance and hospitals, where you get better food, your own room etc. I don’t bother with private hospitals because i’m uber poor. I have been in the hospital system since i was a tween (nearing 40 now), and I’ve paid nothing for it.
