You're viewing a single thread.
At this point the funniest thing would be if the real assassin was to take down another healthcare CEO.
Someone, can't remember who...so if it's you (not necessarily you OP, a general you) put your hand up, in a different Luigi thread a month or so ago had a pet theory that I think probably holds a reasonable amount of water.
The theory is that that CEO was knocked off by a paid hitman, possibly contracted by his spouse, and Luigi happened to be picked up as a scapegoat because the NYPD, or the arresting officer, was complicit/paid off a tidy sum.
With this coming up, it's even less of an unlikely scenario.
Why would the hitman engrave the bullets? If they're picking a plausible scapegoat with severe medical issues, then why one that's young rich and handsome?
Man, I never said the theory was....dare I say.... bulletproof? 🤓
Buuuuuut....if all the evidence was planted? Look, the "manifesto", the engraved bullets, the whole thing is a cop's wet dream. I'm willing to believe Luigi is in fact the triggerman, willing to believe that he's unhinged enough to have toted all that about with him. You gotta think though....the NYPD were frothing, Altoona PD are under staffed, under paid. Not outside the realm of possibility it's a frame job.
Just a tinfoil hat theory that I thought was...fun? Not really the best word for it, but fits well enough.
The theory is that that CEO was knocked off by a paid hitman, possibly contracted by his spouse, and Luigi happened to be picked up as a scapegoat because the NYPD, or the arresting officer, was complicit/paid off a tidy sum.
This would be a better theory if Luigi had a serious alibi. Also, if he wasn't tied up with the Silicon Valley Longtermist movement, which has already produced a number of more low-profile killings.
I wouldn't discount the pet theory, because it does sound like the kind of shit mega-millionaires get up to. But the NYPD picking up this guy specifically, where and when they did, with no credible counternarrative as to where he was at the time of the killing, makes me strongly suspect they have the right guy. But - like with the OJ Brown-Simpson murder - they've got such a clown car of detectives and a grandstanding mayor and self-insert celebrity journalists and prosecutors promoting the case as spectacle that they're going to completely fuck this thing at trial.
If he wins the criminal case but loses a far more professionally executed civil "wrongful death" case a few years later, I would not be surprised in the slightest.
Does it have to be healthcare? I mean, there are some other candidates to consider
Starting with almost every single billionaire.
Almost
Now I’m intrigued. Which billionaires should we spare and why?
I mean, Taylor Swift recently crossed the line and she’s been incredibly generous with it. So has Bezos’ ex-wife.
Does the work done at the Gates Foundation get them a pass?
Is there really “no such thing as an ethical billionaire”? Should there be no exceptions?
All good options.
I would argue that while billionaires are stealing your money, healthcare CEOs are taking lives, which is more important in my mind.
Which isn't to say that billionaires don't deserve the same treatment, this is just prioritization for the most benefit in the shortest amount of time.... Long term, a lot more heads need to roll.
Both is the correct answer.
I'm just putting an emphasis on the healthcare industrial machine in the USA because it's causing more acute harm to the people of the USA than anyone else.
Hard to amass billions without taking lives in some form.
I won't disagree. Most billionaires are at least indirectly responsible for significant harm and loss of life. Whether they support, endorse or profit from inhumane, cruel and exploitative business practices, such as we see in the cobalt mines of the Congo, or other mineral mines whether for diamonds, lithium, or whatever...
Or they are profiting or directly befitting from people who are underpaid, and eventually, because of corporate profiteering, forced into poverty and they die because they are unable to afford to live... Or they are denying people life saving pharmaceuticals though supporting or profiting from the drug industry, or ownership therein (in whole or in part)....
Or they're more directly responsible for harm by being an active voice in, or in support of, denying, deposing, and delaying, anything that might reduce a companies profits, especially healthcare companies.
The reality of it is: when you achieve a certain level of monetary wealth, your money is invested. Frequently those investments support something that doesn't causes harm and death to your fellow humans.
Therefore: anyone with sufficient wealth to warrant investments, is almost always, someone endorsing, supporting, or profiting from the pain, suffering, and deaths, of other people. QED: all billionaires are evil, mass murdering pieces of shit, who should be strung up and quartered in the town square. I will settle for seeing their heads roll.
Where did I put my guillotine?
You son of a bitch, I’m in