Tuesday, December 10, 2024

The “Silent Violence” of Corporate Greed  and Power



 December 10, 2024
Facebook

Image by Jon Tyson.

For decades consumer groups have been sounding clarion calls for action against the “silent violence” causing massive casualties that arise from the unbridled power of corporate greed, criminal negligence or indifference. They cite statistical and case studies that the media and lawmakers mostly ignored or relegated to low levels of enforcement.

Corporate bosses just have their corporate lawyers and public relations hacks brush away such warnings and pleas. One day stories they knew would not have legs if they just kept quiet or mumbled some general words of regret, promising some vague improvements to their products and services.

But year after year, the deadly toll goes up, not down, and the horrors continue. For example, at least 5000 people A WEEK die in hospitals in the U.S. due to “preventable problems,” concluded a peer-reviewed study by Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine physicians in 2016. This is just one of numerous such studies of hospital-induced infections, overuse of antibiotics, medical malpractice or what is called “medical error,” prescribing bundles of drugs that backfire, “accidents,” deskilling and understaffing.

There has been no mass mobilization by either government officials or industry executives to address this staggering toll of at least 250,000 fatalities a year!

Behind these figures are real people with families, friends and coworkers shocked, incensed or despondent over avoidable losses of life and preventable harms. Some of them undoubtedly knew the specific causes and demanded correction and compensation, to no avail.

Avoidable casualties also arise from the sweeping denial of insurance coverage for ill or injured patients by greedy unregulated or underregulated health insurance companies maximizing profits and bonuses for CEOs. Many insurance companies are now using AI to help wear down consumers.

About two thousand Americans a week lose their lives because they cannot afford health insurance to cover prompt diagnosis and treatment costs. System-driven patterns of denial of benefits by health insurers also cause deaths and injuries. The companies have algorithms that automatically delay or deny needed procedures without even seeing a patient’s medical records or speaking with the patient’s physician.

Insurance policies are full of fine print deductibles, co-pays, waivers and exclusions that drive consumers and their doctors up the wall. Insurance premiums are paid by patients or employers ahead of time with advertised assurances.

In the past two months, consumers have been overwhelmed by a blizzard of television ads by giant insurers e.g., Aetna, Cigna, and Humana for their Medicare (dis)Advantage plans aimed at elderly beneficiaries. The ads are loaded with “freebies” that paint the companies as charities instead of cunning commercial marketers. In reality, denial of benefits is higher for these plans than for traditional Medicare. Moreover, these plans push patients into narrow networks of physicians and hospitals and subject them to dreadful over-use of “prior authorization.” The latter means some remote company doctor or medical professional decides whether a physician with a patient can be reimbursed for a specific treatment. This results in overwhelming paperwork for the doctors, immense profits for the companies and degraded treatment for patients.

An October 31, 2023 NBC investigation titled “‘Deny, deny, deny’: By rejecting claims, Medicare Advantage plans threaten rural hospitals and patients,” by star reporter Gretchen Morgenson exposed another deadly impact of Medicare (dis)Advantage programs on rural hospitals in America.

These companies are so entrenched that they have become largely immune to exposés. They have gamed the system to straitjacket both patients and healthcare workers. The healthcare industry gets away with about $360 billion in computerized billing fraud and abuses every year. (https://scholar.harvard.edu/msparrow/license-to-steal). Prosecutions are minimal, and lawmakers are mostly indifferent as they count their campaign cash donations. Did you see any of the major party politicians in this year’s election campaigns even mention the devastating impact of the medical industry’s greed on innocent people or the taxpayers?

Just under the surface is a seething whirlpool of resentment, anger, frustration and bitterness about corporate abuses. Such reactions are often most pronounced in poor areas or workplaces, where people are subjected to choking pollution or exposure to carcinogenic toxins leading to cancer, heart disease and other organ ailments.

The corporate perpetrators, however, are remote from the impacts of their operations and policies. Their hugely overpaid bosses rule from elaborate suites and enjoy unimaginable luxuries. Very few people know the names, even of the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies like ExxonMobil, Aetna, Humana, Duke Energy, Bank of America, and so on. The lethality, the theft, the domination, and the escape from the rule of law are rendered impersonally by the corporatists who are now investing huge sums to go even more abstract and remote with tyrannical generative AI algorithms.

This week, a man, still on the run, made his anger very personal. Around 7:00 AM he singled out, in front of a busy midtown Manhattan hotel, the chief executive of the giant UnitedHealthcare, Brian Thompson, and shot him. The assassin fled on an electric bike. Police collected the bullet casings from his pistol. On these casings were the words, “deny,” “delay” and “depose.”

As news of this fatal shooting spread over social media, a torrent of angry or morbid comments flooded the Internet. The New York Times reported a few, to wit:

“I’m an ER nurse and the things I’ve seen dying patients get denied for by insurance makes me physically sick. I just can’t feel sympathy for him because of all of those patients and their families.”

“Thoughts and deductibles to the family,” read one observer underneath a video of a CNN picture. “Unfortunately, my condolences are out of network.”

Tragically, Mr. Thompson, according to a company employee, was one of the few executives who spoke of changing the culture of the company.

But corporate culture, marinated to the core with endless cravings for ever-growing easy profits, is very hard to change – especially when it is so easy to extract more and more premium dollars from powerless consumers who lack adequate regulatory protections.

And so, the social media explosion included this typical comment on TikTok: “I pay $1,300 a month for health insurance with an $8,000 deductible. ($23,000 yearly) When I finally reached that deductible, they denied my claims. He was making a million dollars a month.”

The New York Times described a “wrenching outpouring from patients and family members who posted horror stories of insurance claim reimbursement stagnation and denials.” The ugly reality will continue to exponentially pour out with volcanic fury as the media receives more public reactions.

One wonders about the reaction if this were to have happened four months before the November election. Could the uproar have transformed the slimy rhythms of the Harris campaign, orchestrated by the Democrats’ corporate-conflicted political consultants who manage the candidate messages and who definitely don’t listen to the warnings and popular proposals by Senator Bernie Sanders?

Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate, lawyer and author of Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us! 

FIFA’s Cooked Findings: Saudi Arabia’s World Cup Bid



 December 10, 2024
Facebook

Photograph Source: albinfo – CC BY-SA 4.0

FIFA has done it again.  With its usual sparkle of inventive interpretation, amoral reasoning, and snappy bravura, the world football federation has deemed the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia fit for hosting the largest sporting event on the sporting calendar – not counting the Olympics.  The FIFA Men’s World Cup will be hosted, yet again, in a desert country, where football is a most recent thing but cunning opportunism not.

There are certainly many things going the way of Saudi Arabia, which submitted its official bid to host the tournament in July this year.  For one thing, hosting such gargantuan events is crushingly costly to country, city and populace.  Such discouragement tends to thin the field of contenders.  (Saudi Arabia was the sole bidder for the 2034 tournament.)

The country has also engaged in a sporting strategy that currently involves more than 900 sponsorship deals, one-third of which can be linked back to the country’s US$925 billion sovereign wealth fund.  Football, in particular, has seen enormous investment from the Kingdom, be it through sponsorships, partnerships or investments.  These measures are vital parts of the Kingdom’s “Vision 2030” program.

report by the publicly funded Danish sports ethics institute Play the Game notes a degree of sophistication and versatility on the part of the Kingdom’s sporting leaders.  “Unlike many of their counterparts in global sports, Saudi sports leaders hold multiple roles that combine leadership in the sports sector with high-ranking positions within the state apparatus, granting them unparalleled political and financial authority.”

These figures are chameleon in nature, simultaneously holding positions in the sporting field, vital ministries, state-owned enterprises, and the sovereign wealth fund itself.  The authors of the report identify Yasir Al-Rumayyan as an example, a figure who occupies the position of governor of the Public Investment Fund and chairman of the state-owned oil and gas giant Aramco, in addition to being directly involved in sports.  Doing so permits a seamless “transition between acting as a sports leader, financial heavyweight, or a state representative, depending on the context.”

Given the Kingdom’s extensive cultivation and fostering football, FIFA’s assessment of the bid was never going to be too harsh.  Besides, football’s main governing body has its own partnership with Aramco, which was announced in April this year.  “This partnership,” stated FIFA President Gianni Infantino, “will assist FIFA to successfully deliver its flagship tournaments over the next four years and, as is the case with all our commercial agreements, enable us to provide enhanced support to our 211 FIFA member associations across the globe.”  Infantino went on to note Aramco’s “strong record of supporting world-class events” while also taking an interest in “developing grassroots sports initiatives.”

The announcement did not impress over a hundred international women footballers who signed an open letter to the FIFA president decrying the Kingdom’s elaborate sportswashing exercise.  “Saudi authorities have been spending billions in sports sponsorship to distract from the regime’s brutal human rights reputation, but its treatment of women speaks for itself.”  These included the imprisonment of Salma al-Shebab, Manal al-Gafiri, Fatima al-Shawarbi, Sukaynah al-Aithan and Nourah al-Qahtani.

The letter also went on to lacerate the Saudi authorities for trampling “not only on the rights of women, but on the freedom of all other citizens too.  Imagine LGBTQ+ players, many of whom are heroes of our sport, being expected to promote Saudi Aramco during the 2027 [Women’s] World Cup, the national oil company of a regime that criminalises the relationships that they are in and the values they stand for?”

These were merely rumblings to FIFA, whose assessment was almost embarrassingly glowing, coming in at 4.2 out of 5.  The risk assessment for human rights was graded as “medium”.  The Saudi Gazette cooed with satisfaction at an evaluation that was “the highest in the tournament’s history.”

In its assessment, FIFA claimed to have “consulted various sources, including the bidder’s human rights strategy, the mandated context assessment, as well as direct commitments from the host country and host cities, together with all contractual hosting documents, all of which notably contain provisions relating to respecting human rights in connection with the competition”.

The governing body pushed the familiar and erroneous argument that the sport had “good potential” to engender reforms and “contribute to positive human rights outcomes”.  Riyadh had also shown a “good commitment to sustainability” though FIFA had to accept that the climate posed an “elevated risk”.

Many of the findings were reached on the basis of a report entitled “Independent Context Assessment Prepared for the Saudi Arabian Football Federation in relation to the FIFA World Cup 2034”.  (The term “independent” in most reports suggests the contrary.)  The assessments were always going to be favourably cooked.  For one, it was authored by the Saudi arm of the Clifford Chance law firm.  The report also failed to consider a range of relevant international human rights instruments given that the Kingdom had either not ratified them or because the Saudi Football Federation did not deem them relevant to the assessment.  No mention, then, of freedom of expression, association and assembly, let alone discrimination against LGBTQI+ communities, the right to freedom of religion or certain labour rights such as trade union membership.

Human rights groups have been busy trying to shift the focus back to the Kingdom’s spotty resume.  In a October 28 statement, 11 organisations including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Football Supporters Europe, labour organisations, Gulf human rights groups and a Saudi Arabian diaspora group warned that a poor human rights record had worsened “under the de facto rule of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has presided over a soaring number of mass executions, torture, enforced disappearance, severe restrictions on free expression, repression of women’s rights under the male guardianship system, LGBTI+ discrimination, and the killing of hundreds of migrants at the Saudi Arabia-Yemen border.”  The Kafala (labour sponsorship) system, along with the prohibition of trade unions, continued to result in the exploitation of migrant workers.

Not all has been smooth on the matter of endorsing FIFA’s decision, at least at the level of various football organisations whose approval is also sought.  But even there, Saudi sporting strategy has been in evidence to ensure a lack of dissent.  The Asian Football Confederation (AFC), for instance, was hardly going to disagree with the choice, given Riyadh’s embrace of the AFC as a global partner between 2021 and 2024, a relationship that was renewed in July 2024 for a further five years.

At this writing, the Football Association remains uncertain on whether an official endorsement will be forthcoming.  While the BBC has been told that FA officials are troubled by the human rights dimension, there is also a concern that accusations of hypocrisy will follow should the organisation then participate in the tournament.  No one, it seems, wants to miss out on the party.  And the Saudi authorities know this all too well.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

TOOK LONG ENOUGH

Greyhound racing is increasingly rare worldwide. New Zealand now plans to outlaw the practice

New Zealand's racing minister says the country will outlaw greyhound racing, citing the injury rates for racing dogs


By CHARLOTTE GRAHAM-MCLAY 
Associated Press
December 10, 2024, 12:30 AM




WELLINGTON, New Zealand -- New Zealand plans to outlaw greyhound racing because too many dogs are hurt or killed, the government said Tuesday, spelling an end to the practice in one of the few countries where it still operates.

The racing of greyhounds as a betting sport was wildly popular at times last century. But the number of dogs euthanized due to race-day injuries, or because homes cannot be found for them after their short careers end, has provoked animal welfare campaigns and growing public distaste for the sport.

Commercial greyhound racing continues in the United States, Australia, the U.K. and Ireland, with only two tracks remaining in the U.S. after many states ended the practice.

New Zealand’s ban is not yet law but has universal political support. The government plans to stop the racing from Aug. 1, 2026, to allow the 2,900 racing dogs to be rehomed and more than 1,000 people employed in the industry to find other work, Racing Minister Winston Peters said Tuesday.

New Zealand’s greyhound racing industry has faced repeated reviews in recent years over its dog safety record, with multiple reports urging sweeping changes. Peters said the industry had made progress -– but not enough.

Stricter policies governing when dogs can be euthanized, and rehoming programs that send retired New Zealand greyhounds abroad as pets when homes cannot be found domestically, have reduced the numbers killed each year. But the percentage of dogs injured “remains persistently high,” Peters said.

“The time has come to make a call in the best interest of the animals,” he said.

Greyhound Racing New Zealand, an industry group, accused the government of not recognizing improvements made, including its commitment to tracking the care of every retired dog for the rest of its life. Tuesday’s announcement was “a devastating blow,” said chair Sean Hannan.

The animal welfare organization SPCA praised the government for showing “compassion for dogs made to work in a dangerous gambling industry.” The practice has long been out of favor in New Zealand, spokesperson Arnja Dale said.

Some lawmakers in parliament on Tuesday described the racing industry’s end as inevitable following the steady decline of greyhound racing worldwide.


Commercial racing operates in four other countries. In the U.S., its popularity peaked in the 1980s and the number of states allowing the practice has dwindled since then amid reports of dog mistreatment and the explosion of other gambling options.

Only two tracks remain -– both in West Virginia -– after Iowa, Arkansas and Florida shuttered their racing industries. Greyhounds have become popular as pets in the U.S., and New Zealand has sent dozens of dogs to new owners there when homes could not be found in the country of 5 million people.

Greyhound racing is also legal in Australia, where critics have decried the practice, and the rules governing it vary by state. Commercial racing currently operates throughout the U.K. and Ireland, but the Scottish parliament is considering a ban there.

The practice remains legal in Mexico and Vietnam, but there are no longer operational tracks in either country, according to information supplied by Peters’ office.

Hours after it announced the end to greyhound racing, New Zealand's government rushed through a law to prevent dogs from being killed while the industry winds down, unless a veterinarian deems it unavoidable. This will prevent owners from euthanizing dogs for economic reasons, Peters said.

Lawmakers unanimously agreed to the change.

The law shutting down the industry will take longer, however, and is not expected to pass until next year after a period of public submissions. All political parties support the ban.
CANCEL CULTURE

Google pulls McDonald's negative reviews over arrest in UnitedHealth murder


A television reporter broadcasts from outside a McDonald's restaurant where a suspect in the killing UnitedHealth executive Brian Thompson, identified as Luigi Mangione, 26, was arrested in Altoona, Pennsylvania, US on Dec 9, 2024.

Reuters
December 10, 2024 12:58 AM

WASHINGTON — Google on Monday (Dec 9) removed derogatory reviews about McDonald's after the suspect in the killing of UnitedHealth executive Brian Thompson was arrested at its restaurant in Altoona, Pennsylvania, where police say a customer alerted a local employee about him.

The negative comments aimed at McDonald's were the latest in what is known as 'review bombing', where an establishment is hit with a litany of bad reviews based on a political view or an occurrence unrelated to its actual business.

In this case, the negative and one-star reviews showed up after Luigi Mangione, 26, was captured at a McDonald’s in Altoona. He was spotted eating at the restaurant by a customer who alerted a McDonald's employee, state police said.


"These reviews violate our policies and have been removed," a Google spokesperson said in an emailed statement.

The policy says that review contributions "should reflect a genuine experience at a place or business" and that "content that has been posted from multiple accounts to manipulate a place's rating" will be removed.

"This location has rats in the kitchen that will make you sick and your insurance isn't going to cover it," one review said.

The insurance executive's murder unleashed a wave of frustration from Americans who have seen their health insurance claims or care denied, faced unexpected costs or paid more for premiums and medical care — all trends that are rising, according to recent data.

Thompson, 50, was gunned down outside a Manhattan hotel early on Wednesday morning by a masked man who appeared to wait for his arrival before shooting the executive from behind.


The suspect ran from the scene and then rode a bike into Central Park. Surveillance video captured him exiting the park and taking a taxi to a bus station in northern Manhattan, where police believe he got on a bus to flee the city. Police said Thompson appeared to be deliberately targeted.

The suspect was arrested after a five-day manhunt.
PAKISTAN

Enigmatic Bhuttos

Dr Niaz Murtaza 
December 10, 2024 




STATES traverse the democratic path in the vehicles of political parties, which are driven by political families in our region. One must review how their actions have shaped our tortuous political journey heavily, starting with the Bhuttos, our oldest, most colourful, federal-level political family.

Salient politically in all eras since the 1950s, it exhibits an odd, schizophrenic persona that fights for democracy one step but undoes it next step in power. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was in our first, most neoliberal and pro-US military set-up from day one. He initiated strong China ties but also backed Operation Gibraltar that led to the 1965 war. He then transformed into a hawkish national interest icon and a socialist democrat to oppose the Tashkent peace deal, and launched the then western wing’s first federal, socialist mass party.

But after toppling his patron autocrat, he allied again with the new one (Yahya) against fellow socialist democrat Mujib, to cause the tragic 1971 atrocities and division. In power, he gave our first rights-based, lasting Constitution, and strong but dependent Gulf ties. He started a nuclear programme for security. But security comes more from being at peace internally and regionally. He fired two opposition provincial set-ups, restarted army action in Balochistan, politicised the bureaucracy, oversaw dubious nationalisation and only limited land reforms, declared Ahmadis non-Muslim, and muffled free speech. He rigged the 1977 polls, which led to his fall.

Since then, the Bhuttos have shown such schizophrenia many times. They opposed Zia and Musharraf and other covert establishment autocrats to suffer the murder of some family members as well as prolonged incarceration and the wrongful sacking of three PPP regimes. But in power, they undid democracy through allegedly corrupt and inept set-ups at the centre and in the provinces; the Taliban’s creation in the 1990s; bloody battles with the MQM; and dubious IPP deals. Besides, they helped in the establishment’s toppling of opposition set-ups and initially refused to reappoint the Musharraf-fired judges.

The PPP’s political sins arguably dwarf others’ wrongs.


The PPP’s few pluses included the 18th Amendment, the Benazir Income Support Programme, and the first smooth civilian power transfer between two fairly elected set-ups in 2013, making 2008-2013 their least bad era. But all that was largely undone in the last two and a half years as part of a set-up that has delayed and rigged polls; hounded the opposition, media and civil society; defied the courts, and, lastly, reversed judicial freedom via the 26th Amendment. Some say that the abbreviation should stand for ‘Pindi Puppet Party’. Newer generations have not learnt any lessons.

The review reveals some key points. The Bhuttos and the PPP have suffered more in opposition and may have better foreign, legislative and social sector feats than others. But their bigger minuses mean they have arguably still caused more harm to democracy than any other political force in our history, despite others such as the PML-N, the PTI and the pre-1958 Muslim League having overall bad records too — though perhaps none of them beats the PPP in inflicting harm on democracy except the establishment. This is partly because none of them have the PPP’s long span — for example, the PTI has been around for about 20 years. But even if we just take their first 20 years, their political sins arguably dwarf others’ wrongs.

To develop a better picture, I checked the democratic record of the top South Asian political families. But even among regional political families, liberal or conservative, and with longer spans, according to my analysis, the Bhuttos had the worst ranking.

How could they undermine democracy even more than right-wing dispensations, despite overtly displaying good traits like being democratic, socialist, secular, cosmopolitan and literate, with Berkeley-Oxford pedigree? Among the regional political families, only the Bhuttos are landed elites. Perhaps the strong effect of a retrogressive culture undoes even generations of liberal education at the best global schools. The Bhuttos will continue to rule Sindh and may even rule federally, but apparently only with covert help. However, they may not improve their past record much.

Among others, the Muslim League’s story under the founding fathers is the second worst, but it may anger state hawks if it is told. The Sharifs provide a vivid story to tell, though it is shorter and duller. The Imran Khan/PTI story is short but stormy. Like Scheherazade from Arabian Nights, I will tempt you to wait to hear those stories.

The writer is a political economist with a PhD from the University of California, Berkeley.
murtazaniaz@yahoo.com
X: @NiazMurtaza2

Published in Dawn, December 10th, 2024