So you’re saying you’re pro vigilantes and pro death penalty without court order?
Besides, that CEO didn’t kill anyone personally. One could argue you killed a few kids yourself by buying cheap electronics and clothing. If you now start just killing people that you think deserve dying because of some moral standard you think you have, you’re a fucking lunatic without any moral standard.
Can you explain why only victims of the likes of Thompson should fear, but the CEOs don’t need to fear even though they profit from rejecting life- or health-saving treatments?
So, Hitler wasn’t bad. Stalin was OK, didn’t kill anyone right?
But their decisions did. Their position of power allowed them to.
Just cause they didn’t murder directly doesn’t mean they played a fair game. They knew exactly what they were doing. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes goes for bad people too.
The CEO is however a robber baron operating at the times of peace, using different methods but achieving the same end - people dying, most often miserably. I don’t see how that’s better.
Right, but still a person who had a part in making the lives of lots of people miserable or unnecessarily short.
If a CEO isn’t responsible for the policies of the company they’re CEO of, why would you need a CEO in the first place?
He didn’t kill personally, he just gave orders to other people to kill people.
Which means his killer didn’t kill anyone personally either, he just pressed some trigger and the gun did everything else
how many has that CEO killed?
So you’re saying you’re pro vigilantes and pro death penalty without court order?
Besides, that CEO didn’t kill anyone personally. One could argue you killed a few kids yourself by buying cheap electronics and clothing. If you now start just killing people that you think deserve dying because of some moral standard you think you have, you’re a fucking lunatic without any moral standard.
Can you explain why only victims of the likes of Thompson should fear, but the CEOs don’t need to fear even though they profit from rejecting life- or health-saving treatments?
So, Hitler wasn’t bad. Stalin was OK, didn’t kill anyone right?
But their decisions did. Their position of power allowed them to.
Just cause they didn’t murder directly doesn’t mean they played a fair game. They knew exactly what they were doing. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes goes for bad people too.
The CEO is not a violent dictator commiting war crimes
The CEO is however a robber baron operating at the times of peace, using different methods but achieving the same end - people dying, most often miserably. I don’t see how that’s better.
Right, but still a person who had a part in making the lives of lots of people miserable or unnecessarily short.
If a CEO isn’t responsible for the policies of the company they’re CEO of, why would you need a CEO in the first place?
Hitler killed Hitler. Pretty good score.
^(It’s fucking sarcasm, of course.)
Honestly that fact was known to me, but I just realized he was the good guy/hero we needed after what he did…
He didn’t kill personally, he just gave orders to other people to kill people.
Which means his killer didn’t kill anyone personally either, he just pressed some trigger and the gun did everything else