This is only politics-adjacent, but I am curious on your thoughts.
I've been watching the news coverage of the shooting of United Health Care CEO Brian Thompson and I have been struck by the media's unwillingness to address this event's elephant in the room.
I don't an executive should be murdered for what he or she does at work. That being said, I have heard a number of vague contextual comments for the motive along the lines of "well, health insurance can be a contentious subject."
But in the this case, if the murder did take place because of unhappiness with some aspect of health insurance, it seems disingenuous not to at least touch on the fact that Thompson was a controversial CEO even in a controversial industry.
United Health Care has the largest number of claim denials in the industry - 32%, which is more than four times higher than the industry's lowest company. It has been using an AI-based program to examine claims, which even the company admits can have an error rate close to 90% in some categories.
Thompson was one of several United Health executives under investigation for selling off company stock before an anti-trust lawsuit filed against the company was made public.
I could go on and on with this.
But do you think that any of this is "newsworthy" in the context of his murder? I would argue that it is. Not in an effort to blame the victim. But to explain the anger surrounding the company's business. And it also helps explain today's negative social media reaction.
A lot of people on social media are justifying the assassination because he is an uncaring figurehead of an organization.
I think that is a bit unfair as no senior executive is down in the weeds denying individual claims. Yes, he is responsible for overall profitability of the organization, but it is underlings (way down the chain of command) who actually determine whether individual claims are to paid or not.
To be clear, I don't think he deserved to be shot.
But while he wasn't the person making the individual denial decisions, he was the one making the strategic decisions that encouraged the behavior. In fact, he was frequently touting the company's ability to continually reduce costs.
FWIW, I expanded on this point today in my newsletter:
This stupid "Golden At-Bat" thing isn't actually going to happen, right? Even Rob Manfred has enough sense not to really pursue this abomination, right? RIGHT!?
More of a comment than a question. Really appreciate all of your content. It’s been fantastic pre and post election. The Chuck Todd conversation has become a go to for me on Monday. And I always make sure to keep up with the Sunday Best. I’m listening to “The Rest of History” on my long drive tonight. Keep up the great work!
Given that I think we should take President-Elect Trump at his word(s), and given his nominees so far, what is your take on pre-emptive pardons? I do know that even a frivolous prosecution costs a load in lawyer fees to someone that maybe didn’t write a book and have a 6-figure advance but earns a relatively normal salary. Will it be fair that everyone on those “enemy lists” is going to have to lawyer-up for speaking truth as they knew it?
Why is it that neither of the main parties, nor any of the smaller for that matter, represent my views? I'm not asking this facetiously so much as to point out that many positions staked out on the left *and* the right seem so lacking in nuance or subtlety, so divorced from my actual life and its concerns, that I wonder how they can be called representative at all. Yet on they go - so is it any wonder that people get disillusioned with politics?
A blend is probably the best way to describe it, with my strongest feelings being directed towards an internationalist approach, meaning open borders and free trade.
Well conservatives used to be more free trade but that has changed under Trump. And they certainly don't want open borders, although Democrats also don't want open borders. They are more pro immigration though than Republicans.
Do you wonder what nefarious corrupt positioning is happening while we watch the nominations circus? What is happening behind the curtain? Because that's what is important, I believe.
Do you think the first elected female U. S. President will be a Democrat or Republican? Do you think this female is currently older or younger than 21 years of age? I know the age requirement for the presidency is 35, but am curious to get your feel about how long it will take for the American electorate to elect a female President. Thank you for all you do!
What’s the mechanism for Trump to go after his enemies? Can he prosecute anyone for just doing their job -e.g. Liz Chaney, Jack Smith, Adam Kinzinger, any news people, etc? Doesn’t the DOJ have to have evidence that these people broke the law? If charged, can they be out on bail? Can they just be arrested? You would think not but in the next administration could all bets be off? If any of this happens, we really are moving towards having no rights at all
Chris - How does America regain faith in our justice system? If there was ever more proof that people are above the law, Biden pardoned his son and Trump will never face a trial for trying to steal an election and stealing classified documents. How do we restore America's faith in one of our key institutions?
In the wake of the Hunter Biden pardon, and I must say I am not surprised but I am disappointed by it, I have to ask, is there a point to the Democrats taking the high road going forward? Fighting with President Trump on his terms never works. He always claims victory no matter the outcome and if his reelection teaches us anything, people don't care. But in the wake of Hunter Biden's pardon, people like Jim Jordan and MTG who reportedly asked for pardons and Dinesh D'Souza who received one are lecturing Democrats. Not to mention that a man who paid a sex worker to frame his brother-in-law is now the pardoned Ambassador to France. So why go high? Don't roll in the mud, but just play the game. Trump, Jordan, and MTG et al are going to spike the football no matter what you do and the voters don't care. They just want cheap eggs.
The Pete Hegseth situation raises the question of how much bad behavior by talent is tolerated and goes unreported in the TV news pundit industry? Is there some kind of DC insider culture?Does DC change people - you would know since you have said you’re from CT? I remember my fellow church members near Boston being shocked - I mean SHOCKED - when Brett Kavanaugh said, “Almost everyone did it!” in reference to teenagers drinking beer in Washington, DC. Like, w-h-a-t? Always made me wonder if DC changes people? Maybe we were all prudes or none of us came from families that went to fancy private schools. We liked Neil Gorsuch and Mrs Barret was tolerable, but that Kavanagh guy was no good).
I feel you truly believe that our democracy will survive Trump, but I don’t see how it’s possible because there is nobody to stand in his way now. Any thoughts you have on this would bring me great comfort.
I've been reading much about the "Trump Revenge Tour" and how he is going to go after those who came after him. Then, add in all of the recent quotes from Kash Patel, as well as other Trump sycophants in the House and Senate. Who would Trump's DOJ actually go after, what crimes could/would they be charged with, and what evidence could possibly be presented to a grand jury to get a criminal indictment? Is it just a bunch to talk, "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing?"
Hi Chris -- Based on absolutely nothing, I have a hunch that Republicans in the Senate may be able to knock out a Matt Gaetz or Pete Hegseth early on, but they will only show enough independence to torpedo ONE Trump nominee after the formal confirmation process begins. I am guessing that it will be Tulsi Gabbard who falls. What do you think about these ideas?
This is more of a personal question(actually 2)with long setup, tied to your YouTube Channel. So feel free to ignore. As someone that followed you after CNN to "So What", at the beginning it seemed like a continuation of "The Point", very produced, with graphics and music. At that time I was surpriseed with how few subscribers you had, less than 10,000 for sure. With a change of style, which is less produced(for the better), also came for a more of a personal approach along with push to add subscribers. Question 1, why the wait in change of format? 2. Would you do it differently from the beginning?
For the record, like how the channel has morphed, you are providing a way to look at something, not telling us "we should be looking at it because you said so".
This is only politics-adjacent, but I am curious on your thoughts.
I've been watching the news coverage of the shooting of United Health Care CEO Brian Thompson and I have been struck by the media's unwillingness to address this event's elephant in the room.
I don't an executive should be murdered for what he or she does at work. That being said, I have heard a number of vague contextual comments for the motive along the lines of "well, health insurance can be a contentious subject."
But in the this case, if the murder did take place because of unhappiness with some aspect of health insurance, it seems disingenuous not to at least touch on the fact that Thompson was a controversial CEO even in a controversial industry.
United Health Care has the largest number of claim denials in the industry - 32%, which is more than four times higher than the industry's lowest company. It has been using an AI-based program to examine claims, which even the company admits can have an error rate close to 90% in some categories.
Thompson was one of several United Health executives under investigation for selling off company stock before an anti-trust lawsuit filed against the company was made public.
I could go on and on with this.
But do you think that any of this is "newsworthy" in the context of his murder? I would argue that it is. Not in an effort to blame the victim. But to explain the anger surrounding the company's business. And it also helps explain today's negative social media reaction.
A lot of people on social media are justifying the assassination because he is an uncaring figurehead of an organization.
I think that is a bit unfair as no senior executive is down in the weeds denying individual claims. Yes, he is responsible for overall profitability of the organization, but it is underlings (way down the chain of command) who actually determine whether individual claims are to paid or not.
To be clear, I don't think he deserved to be shot.
But while he wasn't the person making the individual denial decisions, he was the one making the strategic decisions that encouraged the behavior. In fact, he was frequently touting the company's ability to continually reduce costs.
FWIW, I expanded on this point today in my newsletter:
https://toomuchtv.substack.com/p/too-much-tv-your-tv-talking-points-b38
I don’t believe it. Is only politics-adjacent.
This stupid "Golden At-Bat" thing isn't actually going to happen, right? Even Rob Manfred has enough sense not to really pursue this abomination, right? RIGHT!?
This is the most important question of the week! I’m with you, if we want to watch the Savanna Bananas we will tune in. The MLB isn’t that.
Ivanka and Jared seem to be flying under the radar. What’s up with them?
More of a comment than a question. Really appreciate all of your content. It’s been fantastic pre and post election. The Chuck Todd conversation has become a go to for me on Monday. And I always make sure to keep up with the Sunday Best. I’m listening to “The Rest of History” on my long drive tonight. Keep up the great work!
Yes, the Monday conversations with Chuck Todd alone are worth the price of admission!
It's what got me to subscribe glad I did
Given that I think we should take President-Elect Trump at his word(s), and given his nominees so far, what is your take on pre-emptive pardons? I do know that even a frivolous prosecution costs a load in lawyer fees to someone that maybe didn’t write a book and have a 6-figure advance but earns a relatively normal salary. Will it be fair that everyone on those “enemy lists” is going to have to lawyer-up for speaking truth as they knew it?
Why is it that neither of the main parties, nor any of the smaller for that matter, represent my views? I'm not asking this facetiously so much as to point out that many positions staked out on the left *and* the right seem so lacking in nuance or subtlety, so divorced from my actual life and its concerns, that I wonder how they can be called representative at all. Yet on they go - so is it any wonder that people get disillusioned with politics?
Well, what are your policies?
A blend is probably the best way to describe it, with my strongest feelings being directed towards an internationalist approach, meaning open borders and free trade.
Well conservatives used to be more free trade but that has changed under Trump. And they certainly don't want open borders, although Democrats also don't want open borders. They are more pro immigration though than Republicans.
Do you wonder what nefarious corrupt positioning is happening while we watch the nominations circus? What is happening behind the curtain? Because that's what is important, I believe.
Do you think the first elected female U. S. President will be a Democrat or Republican? Do you think this female is currently older or younger than 21 years of age? I know the age requirement for the presidency is 35, but am curious to get your feel about how long it will take for the American electorate to elect a female President. Thank you for all you do!
I'd bet Republican. When I look at Europe, I see Merkel, Merloni, Thatcher, etc. and they were all center-right (as defined in their countries).
I tend to agree with that.
What’s the mechanism for Trump to go after his enemies? Can he prosecute anyone for just doing their job -e.g. Liz Chaney, Jack Smith, Adam Kinzinger, any news people, etc? Doesn’t the DOJ have to have evidence that these people broke the law? If charged, can they be out on bail? Can they just be arrested? You would think not but in the next administration could all bets be off? If any of this happens, we really are moving towards having no rights at all
I'd like to know these things as well! We need a guest lawyer in the group!
Chris - How does America regain faith in our justice system? If there was ever more proof that people are above the law, Biden pardoned his son and Trump will never face a trial for trying to steal an election and stealing classified documents. How do we restore America's faith in one of our key institutions?
In the wake of the Hunter Biden pardon, and I must say I am not surprised but I am disappointed by it, I have to ask, is there a point to the Democrats taking the high road going forward? Fighting with President Trump on his terms never works. He always claims victory no matter the outcome and if his reelection teaches us anything, people don't care. But in the wake of Hunter Biden's pardon, people like Jim Jordan and MTG who reportedly asked for pardons and Dinesh D'Souza who received one are lecturing Democrats. Not to mention that a man who paid a sex worker to frame his brother-in-law is now the pardoned Ambassador to France. So why go high? Don't roll in the mud, but just play the game. Trump, Jordan, and MTG et al are going to spike the football no matter what you do and the voters don't care. They just want cheap eggs.
Sub question: My wife is a proud Indiana Hoosier. I am worried they are a one year flash in the pan in football. Thoughts?
The Pete Hegseth situation raises the question of how much bad behavior by talent is tolerated and goes unreported in the TV news pundit industry? Is there some kind of DC insider culture?Does DC change people - you would know since you have said you’re from CT? I remember my fellow church members near Boston being shocked - I mean SHOCKED - when Brett Kavanaugh said, “Almost everyone did it!” in reference to teenagers drinking beer in Washington, DC. Like, w-h-a-t? Always made me wonder if DC changes people? Maybe we were all prudes or none of us came from families that went to fancy private schools. We liked Neil Gorsuch and Mrs Barret was tolerable, but that Kavanagh guy was no good).
I feel you truly believe that our democracy will survive Trump, but I don’t see how it’s possible because there is nobody to stand in his way now. Any thoughts you have on this would bring me great comfort.
I've been reading much about the "Trump Revenge Tour" and how he is going to go after those who came after him. Then, add in all of the recent quotes from Kash Patel, as well as other Trump sycophants in the House and Senate. Who would Trump's DOJ actually go after, what crimes could/would they be charged with, and what evidence could possibly be presented to a grand jury to get a criminal indictment? Is it just a bunch to talk, "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing?"
Hi Chris -- Based on absolutely nothing, I have a hunch that Republicans in the Senate may be able to knock out a Matt Gaetz or Pete Hegseth early on, but they will only show enough independence to torpedo ONE Trump nominee after the formal confirmation process begins. I am guessing that it will be Tulsi Gabbard who falls. What do you think about these ideas?
This is more of a personal question(actually 2)with long setup, tied to your YouTube Channel. So feel free to ignore. As someone that followed you after CNN to "So What", at the beginning it seemed like a continuation of "The Point", very produced, with graphics and music. At that time I was surpriseed with how few subscribers you had, less than 10,000 for sure. With a change of style, which is less produced(for the better), also came for a more of a personal approach along with push to add subscribers. Question 1, why the wait in change of format? 2. Would you do it differently from the beginning?
For the record, like how the channel has morphed, you are providing a way to look at something, not telling us "we should be looking at it because you said so".