Utilitarian Choice
Wednesday, 12 Mar 2025
Exclusive insights, data, and analysis for financial market experts.
Search
Have an existing account?
Sign In
Of all the years of seeing various trolley problems I don’t think I have ever seen one where people were willing to be run over to take out the guy next to them.
I _can_ does not imply they _will_, the right choice was made
“Can make you rich”.. but denied, being poor was a preexisting condition.
Dark humor at its finest
Even the train lol
Awesome OP, new though on the old comic.
Nothing can stop Thomas’s bloodlust
Love that that brave dude on the northern track was like. “Yes, my life has value and I want to live, but saving three other people is too important.”
“Another CEO down.” Thomas puffed happily.
Sign up to my [patreon](https://www.patreon.com/c/afterdeathcomics), it’s like health insurance except I’ll provide you with the best medicine you can afford. Laughter*.
Check out my [IG](https://www.instagram.com/afterdeathcomics/), or my [bsky](https://bsky.app/profile/aideesea.com) for your free health coverage of laughter*.
**Laughter is not guaranteed and can be subjected to denial by your provider.*
You know this isn’t real because whoever tied the CEO to the tracks wasted the opportunity they had.
Long live The Adjuster!
Is “I have no notes” supposed to reference something?
The most disturbing part here is that apparently Thomas the Tank Engine gives no fucks about running people over lol
We always assumed the people on the track would be people but no one ever considered that a CEO would be there to.
The train is smiling in the last panel, lol.
Art.
You should have made the train join in.
When the moral dilemma becomes a simple choice:
You know what? This has been an outstanding week for comics and memes.
Is this what passes for a joke these days?
I would switch the tracks to kill the one person, then go on the tracks and brutally maim the CEO personally. Still a net positive in terms of number of lives saved
The blitheness with which Americans are treating this recent event is quite surprising to me as an outsider, I’ve never seen such generally accepted bloodlust for someone within the country.
How is this not breaking rule 3? New to this sub asking so I know what these rules mean and how are they enforced.
How is this actually increasing utility in the world?
So the implication is that choosing the death of the CEO who presumably is directing the company to increase prior authorisations and increasing prescription denial rates. So therefore by not letting them live, they cannot continue to direct the company this way.
But the CEO is probably taking this direction due to shareholders. What happens when the CEO is removed? Wouldn’t they just be replaced with a similar CEO? The next CEO being likely to continue business-as-usual? Or is there some % of denial of prescriptions due to a new less immoral CEO be required for this to be acceptable? Is the death of 1 CEO truly a deterrent for their replacement? Do we actually use this logic anywhere else?
How does the underlying material conditions actually change? Are new regulations passed? Does the US finally get actual modern western-style healthcare? Seems unlikely when applying it to the context of real-life with Trump coming into Office next January.
I take issue with the title.
Under the philosophy of utility, I don’t think killing the three is still the utilitarian choice.
The reason most pressing to my belief is because the CEO will just be replaced with another, and the Healthcare company won’t change.
Hopefully they’ve all got good health insurance (if the survive)
It will be interesting to see if UHC revises its practices under new management. It’s possible that their board of directors is responsible for their poor record.
If only Michael had this in the simulation for Chidi.
I’d be fine with this..