You're viewing a single thread.
When one of the first things you mention about him is "$280B of revenue" as though that's a good thing in the context of health insurance, yeah, fuck you.
That much revenue isn't, by itself, the bad part. Revenue is just how much you take in from your sales. If they had minimal overhead and paid the majority of that out to claims, that would be fine (in the context of our existing healthcare system). The problem is the profit, how much of that $280B goes into the company's pockets instead of claim payouts.
So why mention the revenue figure?
Because they are trying to paint him as a productive member of society. Revenue is still the measure of how much business you do.
Ah yes, I forgot that a person's value is measured only by how much revenue they produce.
They didn't claim that though? They went on to talk about other factors too. The point of mentioning revenue was to portray him as "the American Dream", going from a small town to leading a major company.
Keep in mind I'm not defending the guy, but I don't see the point in being purposely obtuse
How much revenue have you produced?
Produced? Hard to say. Apples to apples would be managed/administrated, that's probably in the neighborhood of $5-10 million. Why?
Just wanted to know how close you are to achieving The American Dream.
Okay? Just because I understand the point they're trying to make doesn't mean I agree with their conclusion. I have no love for that CEO, I just think that there are enough good criticisms that we don't have to twist people's words into things they didn't say.
Murica.
He wanted to write that UHC saved X lives during his tenure, but he didn't want to write something probably wrong, so he went with this instead.