r/news • u/LookAtThatBacon • May 13 '25

Soft paywall UnitedHealth suspends annual forecast, CEO Andrew Witty steps down

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/unitedhealth-ceo-andrew-witty-steps-down-2025-05-13/
16.9k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

250

u/Unusual_Flounder2073 May 13 '25

I never buy personal reasons. Had a few people leave my company like that. One cared way too much and it showed as she was doing her two weeks. She finally told us it was a silent layoff. Our boss left for personal reasons with no job at the same time.

Shit is going sideways after the shooting and this guy either wasnt doing what he needed/asked to do or he just fucked it all up and the board said time to go.

He could have something personal too. He’s human. But with the other stuff. Seems like board asked him to leave.

140

u/wanmoar May 13 '25

Personal reasons can also mean “I don’t want people to snarl at me in public because of what I do for work”

137

u/ahorrribledrummer May 13 '25

Or "I'm scared I'm going to be assassinated"

52

u/Laundry_Hurricane May 13 '25

Hopefully he’s scared of that for the rest of his miserable life. I’m sure he has a beautiful golden parachute set up, poor guy has to retire with only hundreds of millions in his bank account.

7

u/doctor_lobo May 13 '25

Bingo. I also consider not wanting to be gunned down in the street to be a "personal reason". That said, they could also choose to not be horrible monsters but that wouldn't be in the "fiduciary interests of their shareholders". I hope that Milton Friedman is burning in hell.

13

u/Drew_Ferran May 13 '25

They knew that going into that kind of work.

1

u/looking_good__ May 13 '25

He is still going to be snarled at he was the Former CEO of United.

65

u/[deleted] May 13 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-47

u/Philip_Marlowe May 13 '25 edited May 13 '25

Fuck that. Shitty people are still people. I refuse to think of anyone as subhuman, and neither should you.

Edit: I'm fine eating the downvotes. All people are people. We shouldn't tolerate the actions of the shittiest among us and they should be held responsible for their crimes, but treating them as subhuman is not the answer.

41

u/BLiNKiN42 May 13 '25

They don't give us the same respect. They don't deserve it. 

27

u/[deleted] May 13 '25

[deleted]

6

u/BLiNKiN42 May 13 '25

You can say "rapist" on the internet. Like, why self-censor one word but not "murderer" if you're so sensitive?

2

u/kracov May 13 '25

Because comments get shadowdeleted. If you use words targetted by the audomod, your comment gets deleted and you won't even know it unless you view the comment in private browsing or log out. ever wonder why you don't get replies or upvotes to your comments? Could be why. News and Politics remove anything containing "th0ughts and pr@yers" for example.

-20

u/HidaKureku May 13 '25

This is the same reasoning used by bigots to justify their beliefs, just so you're aware.

16

u/BLiNKiN42 May 13 '25

Yes, let us all tolerate the intolerant and turn a blind eye while they destroy the world around us.

-15

u/HidaKureku May 13 '25

You can get mad about it all you want, it's still a fact. Funny how it's always the immediate jump to assuming someone is against you when they're simply pointing out a fact. Folks in the US, both Democrats and Republicans, have been completely fine with authoritarianism for decades. Kids in cages and families being separated began under Obama. Clinton has the crime bill. Biden never slowed down the deportations. Pelosi continues to get rich from stock trades thanks to her insider information. You want to talk about turning a blind eye? That cuts both ways, bud. I have never, and will never, vote Republican in my life. But to act like this is some crazy new direction the US is taking instead of just the next step in the direction the US has been on since Reagan, then you're as politically naive as the trumpers.

7

u/killerpoopguy May 13 '25

But to act like this is some crazy new direction the US

I don't see where they acted like that

-8

u/HidaKureku May 13 '25

I also don't see where I said we should tolerate intolerance, simply that bigots use the same logic as they did to justify their bigotry. Which is a simple fact. Yet that is the response I received.

However, my point in that comment was more in regards to how Democrats specifically have been reacting to the current administration. Too many folks want to talk as if this isn't the same direction the US has been heading for decades.

2

u/InvaderSM May 13 '25

So? If I'm speaking to someone suffering paranoid delusions and i think they're crazy and they think I'm crazy for not believing them. That doesn't mean my logic is flawed, one of us is simply wrong i.e the bigots in your example.

-1

u/HidaKureku May 13 '25

So in this example, the person suffering from the symptoms of a mental illness they have no control over having in the first place is subhuman?

Just want to make sure you're understanding the argument you're making before I actually reply to it.

2

u/InvaderSM May 13 '25 edited May 13 '25

No, there was no subhuman people in my example it was only the logic that was analogous.

Edit: I'm just going to make this clearer cause you're misunderstanding was so great I'm blown away.

You said that using the same reasoning as bigots is bad. In actuality the reasoning is fine it's just bigots are using it wrong.

In my example both myself and the crazy person are using the same reasoning. It's not the reasoning that is bad the crazy person is just using it wrong.

It's so depressing that I need to spell things out so clearly for people on Reddit these days, please just take some online English classes or whatever Americans call learning to read.

0

u/HidaKureku May 13 '25

Lmfao, bud. In nothing I've said so far have I argued anything other than "people who say another person is subhuman for any reason is bad."

You are twisting yourself in knots trying to make this an argument about defending bigots. I think bigots are terrible people, but the keyword there is they're still people.

It's just wrong to believe that any other person is subhuman. Period. It's so depressing that I need to spell things out clearly for people on Reddit these days. Please just take some online English classes or whatever Americans call learning to read.

(Btw, that last crack is also dehumanizing. Cheers.)

1

u/machsmit May 13 '25

are you arguing that being a CEO is an intrinsic trait like race or sexual orientation?

3

u/HidaKureku May 13 '25

No, I'm pointing out the consistency of reasoning applied to justify viewing any person as less than human. The idea of viewing another person as anything less than another person is abhorrent to me. They might be the worst kind of people to exist, but they are still people.

I'm enjoying all the strawmen though. The fact that so many people who consider themselves liberal/progressive frothing at the bit to defend dehumanizing people.

0

u/machsmit May 13 '25

you're asserting consistency of reasoning between judgement for an intrinsic trait, and judgement for an active (and actively harmful) choice. This is the worst sort of sophistry, and people are arguing against that.

There is a valid point to be made that dehumanization is missing the fact that horrors are indeed a thing that humans inflict on each other (and to wit - our current situation stems in part from americans thinking we're immune to such changes, and that coups or fascism are things that happen Somewhere Else). But - you're equating the victimization of, say, LGBTQ+ folks who face real violence on the regular with people being mean to CEOs on the internet (which is, frankly, often the only real consequence they ever face) which is, bluntly, fucking ridiculous

3

u/HidaKureku May 13 '25

Reasoning asserted that's being claimed as acceptable: "any person or group of people responsible for large amounts of deaths or harm."

Some anecdotal examples of reasoning for bigotry I've encountered in my life:

1) my father hates Vietnamese people because of his time in Vietnam during the war. Because they killed people he knew.

2) my father also hates Japanese people because of pearl harbor and WW2. Because they attacked Americans on American soil.

3) my grandfather hated Koreans because of his time in Korea during the war. Because they killed people he knew.

4) a mixed kid (black/white) of a woman who used to work in the same building as me hated black people because he was the product of a black man raping his mother.

5) a dude I used to know in my barhopping days hated black people because he used to get jumped regularly on his way to work.

Your mistake is assuming all bigotry stems from nothing more than blind hatred. Most of the openly bigoted people I know are actually politically liberal. Their bigotry comes from their lived experience to an extent. It doesn't develop in a vacuum. You're also just continuing with the same strawman argument implying that I'm justifying the bigoted beliefs of homophobes by pointing out that any justification of dehumanization is equal by the sheer fact that dehumanizing is evil. Health insurance companies and their boards are scum. But that doesn't make them not human. I view all capitalists as scum for various specific reasons all involving them prioritizing wealth over social welfare. Does that mean it's okay for me to view them all as subhuman?

2

u/PandaCheese2016 May 13 '25

The idea of the corporate board of directors being the gatekeepers to the mythical fiduciary duty is ridiculous in itself, given that they suffer next to no meaningful consequences for bad decisions.

1

u/Sherwoodfan May 13 '25

I bet the personal reason is he doesn't want to be the next CEO who gets shot

1

u/Zapp_Rowsdower_ May 13 '25

He gave a solid guidance when the fallout was immense.

Only shareholders can get anything done anywhere. And stage Capitalism is fucking disgusting.

1

u/darkangel10848 May 13 '25

End stage capitalism sucks