A group of investors sued UnitedHealthcare Group on Wednesday, accusing the company of misleading them after the killing of its CEO, Brian Thompson.
The class action lawsuit — filed in the Southern District of New York — accuses the health insurance company of not initially adjusting their 2025 net earning outlook to factor in how Thompson’s killing would affect their operations.
…
The group, which is seeking unspecified damages, argued that the public backlash prevented the company from pursuing “the aggressive, anti-consumer tactics that it would need to achieve” its earnings goals.
They really just fucking said it…
This economic system is openly hostile to the vast majority of us, the only choice we have is if we participate in it, and that’s not really a choice. Inflation is used to force people into investing, it’s literally there so people don’t just put money under the mattress to save for retirement.
There’s other ways than letting the wealthy do anything and everything they want to everyone else. But it gets harder every day to change it
I strongly suspect this is from some people who own a few shares specifically to file this suit and shed light on the whole system.
The language used clearly spells out that the point of the lawsuit is to roast the company and make it part of the public record. I am surprised that more people here, given our vast experience with trolls, can’t see through this massive trolling.
There was a recent inpour of people from the other site, and they spend all their time posting one-liners based on the headline. They don’t rea the article, most of the time they don’t even understand the headline, just the words in that order.
Reposted this to social media and got that pushback from my conservative friend almost immediately, it’s somewhat of a talking point.
While there’s certainly nothing conclusive there, I’m not really sure I see the point? When the murder first happened, there were already all sorts of talking points about UHC having twice the national average of denials while pocketing billions in wealth and using AI.
When you ask me who is angrier and has more legal capacity to take this kind of action, I’m gonna go with the shareholders. The American people should be the angrier party, but it’s a lot more abstract for them. Shareholders lost MILLIONS. Because, as the filing says, they didn’t make appropriate adjustments to reflect the reality of that situation.
Biggest point of contention here is the language used and it’s ugly, but it’s direct. People can make false flag claims without evidence until the cows come home, but I don’t smell it here.
I hope Adam McKay makes a movie of all this in 3 or so years.
Then you are overly optimistic about the state of the American insurance system…
You think the people owning millions of dollars of stock don’t understand that their profits come from denying claims and people dying?
They’ve normalized that and their social circles 100% do not have us in their “in group” because since birth they have never interacted with people who aren’t wealthy.
We are not people to trust fund babies
We usually talk about the in-group/out group split like that with ethnicity or even religion, but it can develop along any line, and for generations has been there a long economic lines.
They would see nothing wrong with making the statement:
For a recent example, look at feudalism, the royalty were separated from commoners due to privilege and for pretty much all of them they started looking at them as a cop.pletely different species with zero innate value.
It only ended because wealth inequality started to decrease leading to the merchant class providing an opportunity for social mobility that rivaled lesser nobility.
But wealth inequality has been going the other way for a while, we’re already seeing the wealthy act like feudal lords again. I know I went on a rant, but c’mon, the rich are 100% out of touch enough in 2025 to make that statement and genuinely not expect anyone to be upset. It takes effort for them to acknowledge we’re also human, so sometimes they just fucking forget.
Absolutely. They specifically avoid using humanizing language in their filing. Then again, legal language also avoids using humanizing language because there really isn’t a standard legal definition for “person”. No, I actually had to look it up and I could not find one. A lawyer wrote about it in a blog post and it turns out it’s troubling to define “person”, for a myriad of reasons. I quote the blog post in question:
So, they call us “consumers” instead. “Voters”, “Human Capital”, it’s all the same. But they will never see us as people.
You don’t have to be a millionaires trust fund baby to own stocks or to sue as a shareholder.
But it’s more like the people who lost millions of dollars because of this sued, then a couple people with a handful of shares decided to sue one of the largest fucking companies on the planet to draw Americans attention to the fact their healthcare system sucks in 2025…
Like, just think for a second which is more likely, even though both are technically plausible
PREACH. More of this please!
Um, this post was about the mercenary healthcare system. Sure capitalism is bad, but don’t be the vegan at the party, dude.