1235
Comments (151)
sorted by:
232
__bryan 232 points ago +232 / -0

smells a little fake

117
ScottButNotBaio 117 points ago +117 / -0

You mean you don’t just automatically believe the anons on 4chan!?

91
fauxgnaws 91 points ago +91 / -0

I trust 4anon I just don't trust his sister.

28
Workmore2 28 points ago +28 / -0

kek

24
JLCan 24 points ago +24 / -0

Sounded fake to me too, but then, so has everything else that turned out to be true in this pandemic.

7
Gadsden 7 points ago +7 / -0

Right? I want to simply dismiss it, but I've already been thinking it for almost two years.

The last two years are so far fetched that three years ago me would think it sounds like a good fiction novel.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
2
Toolhandluke830 2 points ago +2 / -0

but how awesome would it be if true. Think of all the vaxxers crying.

63
GOPkilledTHEMSELVES 63 points ago +63 / -0

There’s no way an insurance company can waive coverage for 20 years for any cause of death.

31
Powhattan 31 points ago +32 / -1

Wouldn't put it past them to try though.

15
GOPkilledTHEMSELVES 15 points ago +15 / -0

They might try to deny a claim but it will get litigated and the insurance company(ies) will lose because insured’s typically get the benefit of claims occurring in a gray area. Once the first case is lost it’s all down hill for the insurers.

15
HKgoneWild 15 points ago +15 / -0

Even if they try to win, the massive number of suits can be the punishment in itself.

Let lawfare be on the normal person's side for once.

11
Smurfection 11 points ago +11 / -0

You think the insured are going to get the benefit of doubt? that's interesting. Why do you think that?

3
GOPkilledTHEMSELVES 3 points ago +3 / -0

Ambiguity in policy language has been interpreted in favor of the insured over the insurer for a long time. Just look up “policy ambiguity in favor of insured” and you’ll see many rulings. 9th circuit in 2020 ruled ambiguity in favor of insured. It’s common.

2
AngryWriter 2 points ago +2 / -0

Constitution was interpreted as the supreme law of the land for a long time, until recently. Anything is possible with crazy activist judges.

1
Smurfection 1 point ago +1 / -0

yeah, that depends on whether the language is ambiguous.

1
GOPkilledTHEMSELVES 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don’t think it’s ambiguous. I don’t believe there is any language that says a vaccine is equal to suicide.

4
venomouspede 4 points ago +4 / -0

Depending upon the state, they cannot even waive coverage for suicide except within the first 6 months to one year that the policy is purchase.

3
Foreign_Aid_is_Theft 3 points ago +3 / -0

This is the correct answer at least in the US...

3
kmj1104213 3 points ago +3 / -0

My policies are very simple, two pages. Suicide is only able to be challenged in the first 2 years of the policy, after that, the policy is basically: “You die, we pay.”

13
davidmode 13 points ago +13 / -0

yea.

the millions of people who suddenly lose coverage because they felt compelled/ forced/ willfully but ignorantly got the jab? yea, not going to happen.

16
OneBigMaga 16 points ago +16 / -0

Yeah, that's like saying the democrats would steal the election with the most obvious fraud in history and no one will do anything about it.

1
Destineed369 1 point ago +1 / -0

Or Obama would collide with chyna to produce Potentially society destroying bioweapon.

1
kc5ods 1 point ago +1 / -0

but would big mike collide with obama?

5
AngryWriter 5 points ago +5 / -0

Maybe not for the reason above, but if the vaccinated start dying off in large numbers there is a chance for insurance companies to go bankrupt. The whole insurance business is based on carefully calculated odds. If the entire customer base starts dying off at 400% the normal rate, they might not be able to pay out every claim.

2
BeardedNinjaPede 2 points ago +2 / -0

And then the government will step in as the sole provider of health insurance/care and the people will cheer it on.

7
HockeyMom4Trump 7 points ago +7 / -0

Exactly. Then why would anyone get the insurance. This is a lame post and total BS

5
ShampocalypseWOW 5 points ago +6 / -1

Is there a law stopping them? Are there any laws at all that matter? A regulatory body? Nope. Nothing. They own this country.

6
GOPkilledTHEMSELVES 6 points ago +6 / -0

There are contracts stopping them. There is case law stopping them. Quit being an ignorant doomer faggot. If you don’t understand something, best to either keep your mouth shut or add value by asking good questions.

4
fuckjoebiden1337 4 points ago +4 / -0

What laws and contracts? Can you point to them? If I personally offered insurance to a bunch of people then found out that they took a drug that caused a ton of damage I would want to up their rates relative to those who have not at the very least.

2
LoobintheToobin 2 points ago +2 / -0

They have suicide clauses to cover themselves from being taken advantage of. Their proclaimed purpose is to cover and protect from accidental deaths or real life unfortunate occurrences. Self inflicted harm isn’t accidental though it’s mighty unfortunate.

1
GOPkilledTHEMSELVES 1 point ago +1 / -0

Their are time constraints on those suicide clauses. If I bought a policy and then offer myself ten years later, typically falls outside of that exclusion.

1
GOPkilledTHEMSELVES 1 point ago +1 / -0

Look up “insurance policy ambiguity in favor of insured” and you will find plenty of case law supporting what I am saying. The contracts are between the insurer and the insured. That is a binding contract.

3
venomouspede 3 points ago +3 / -0

If you don’t understand something, best to either keep your mouth shut or add value by asking good questions

I think the line you are looking for is: When you lack understanding, it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.

1
GOPkilledTHEMSELVES 1 point ago +1 / -0

I meant what I said lol. That is a good line though. Asking questions is a good thing.

2
JosephBlough 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think my policy said that after two years from signing up I could shoot myself in the head on purpose and it would be covered.

11
darkmodelogon 11 points ago +12 / -1

you can browse confidently here knowing that 95% of posts are complete horse shit. still a better ratio than MSM

9
Treefreak1776 9 points ago +9 / -0

Smells a lot of fake.

7
ShampocalypseWOW 7 points ago +9 / -2

It does but it totally makes sense, too. Life insurance companies run the world (look it up). It stands to reason that they were behind this attack on the public. Why? Because now they can make off with all the money they made off of the vaxtards over the course of their lives and never pay out because they will all be dead within 20 years. The old fucks who actually have policies will certainly die within 20 years whether the jab kills them or not. They paid the most into the insurance schemes and now they will get nothing. The Boomers, most of whom got jabbed, will get no pay out upon their deaths. Think about how much fucking money we are talking. And not just that, they wiped out known unrealized losses. They just made BILLIONS.

4
horsefacestorm 4 points ago +4 / -0

Many would cancel their terms and take out money from any permanent policies they have. That would immediately fuck everyone else with life insurance and their business plan. They wouldn't be able to pay out to anyone.

4
WinMoreReeLess 4 points ago +4 / -0

There has been a rumor about this sort of thing for 8+ months. The legal risks from taking the jab have been a serious source of "hesitancy" for those paying attention.

1
Plashler 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, and it's big enough that congress would intervene to save their VIP donors if the claims/litigation costs turn out to be substantial.

The taxpayer paid for the development of this shit, paid the bureaucrats and police to force it on them, and will pay for the damages it causes.

66
Whenagain 66 points ago +66 / -0

Yea this is bullshit. Insurance companies cannot change the terms of a policy like that for existing policy holders. Also: Suicide usually only voids the policy within the first year or 2. I re-read mine at the beginning of this mess to confirm. There is also no exclusion [in mine] for experimental medical procedures. Fuck them, still ain't getting the shot. I believe it is possible (and probably smart) for insurance companies to make adjustments for future policies based on the data they have now though.

19
fuckthealphabetsoup 19 points ago +20 / -1

While I agree that this post is bullshit; Don't doubt the absolutely stunning lows insurance companies will go through to not pay you; beyond that, laws don't matter to Democrats, why would they matter to insurance companies all the sudden? They absolutely could/would try to change the deal if they know it's going to fuck them - not as bluntly as "We changed the terms of your contract without your consent/knowledge" - maybe more subtly like trying to get you to sign up for another deal with altered terms that, on the surface has a much better offer, or lower costs to you; but is absolutely intended to fuck you over and save the companies ass.

5
Whenagain 5 points ago +5 / -0

This is a good point/caveat. These companies are generally in the business of collecting premiums--not paying out benefits.

1
residue69 1 point ago +2 / -1

maybe more subtly like trying to get you to sign up for another deal with altered terms that, on the surface has a much better offer, or lower costs to you; but is absolutely intended to fuck you over and save the companies ass.

This is exactly what they do.

9
ThoughtCrimeConvict 9 points ago +9 / -0

Correct. The first two years of a policy is known as the "Contestable Period". If the insured dies in this period, a thorough investigation will be conducted to verify that all information provided on the application was accurate and true. Most policies take the additional step to stipulate that suicide in this period will result in a return of premiums paid rather than the death benefit. After the period is up it becomes near impossible to avoid paying the claim. If you lied about smoking and paid non-tobacco rates, too late, the policy must pay. Same goes if you start smoking after the policy was issued. However, dying while committing a felony (ex: felony DUI), then the policy will not pay. I have never seen a policy that rules out experimental interventions, that only exists for health insurance and physician liability polices (both of which can be contested).

5
keeptherepublic100 5 points ago +5 / -0

I suppose it could be a question for new policies and it could effect your rates.

5
WhiskeyDreams 5 points ago +5 / -0

They can and do. You’d have to agree to it though.

They can say hey to keep your policy you have to agree to paying us a certain amount more, or we cut your benefit in half.

I literally just dealt with this for a client.

5
FauciOuchi 5 points ago +6 / -1

Are they changing the terms though? The therapy is volunteer experimental medicine. That definitely is not covered under the policy.

2
Whenagain 2 points ago +2 / -0

They are changing the terms (is what the OP is suggesting). My life insurance policy covers everything not specifically excluded in the contract. So, with no existing exclusions for anything like "experimental medicine/procedures", they must cover it.

24
NoTimeToBleed 24 points ago +25 / -1

His sister needs to tell this guy to quit making shit up and get a job.

18
YOLOSwag_McFartnut 18 points ago +19 / -1

Believing this is like believing Bernie still had a chance.

7
WinstonSmith1984 7 points ago +7 / -0

He does Match me!

13
Smurfection 13 points ago +13 / -0

I don't believe that large companies or insurance companies are at that point yet, but they will be. Unfortunately, at the very same time that the general populace realizes what the jabs have done to entire swaths of the general public will be the same time that acknowledging that will leave the general public with no legal recourse. The waiver every single jabbed person signed says that they knew the jab was experimental and that pfizer, moderna and J&J had no legal liability.

The jabbed can't argue that the jab was law because it wasn't. Nor can they argue that anyone with direct authority told them to get jabbed because no one with direct authority did. Fauci leads the CDC, not U.S. policy on Health and Human Services. In fact, the Health and Human Services Secretary has spent more time pushing transgenderism than bothering to say anything about the jab. The general public can't blame the FDA because the FDA never fully authorized or approved the jab. It only had emergency use authorization. The jabbed aren't going to be able to blame doctors, nurses or hospitals. Frankly, most jabbed people got the jab at a walgreens, Sams club or CVS, not a hospital or clinic.

Only those who fought against employers and can prove they were told by employers, get the jab or you're fired, have any legal case. Not even colleges and universities can be held liable because schools in the U.S. for a long time have required certain vaccinations as a condition for enrollment and participation in school activities. Even in the case of employers, they'll have to prove it was definite and unalterable policy that they were told to get the jab or be fired. A lot of people "think" that's what they heard but in reality, how much of that is in writing? How many people waited until they were actually fired on the basis of not getting jabbed?

All the mandates throughout the whole country rely on a Biden press release and only a Biden Press release, not an executive order, not a bona fide law, not a policy or anything else, solely, a press release.

2
ChinaFlu 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is very insightful, ty

1
Plashler 1 point ago +1 / -0

While reprehensible and evil, you have to admit it's a beautiful plan. Biggest scam in history.

Great post.

3
Smurfection 3 points ago +3 / -0

I'm not sure it was a plan entirely. I think Moderna and Pfizer were solely motivated by money and let me tell ya, you can convince yourself of a lot of things for a billion dollars.

Fauci and entire bureaucracy of the CDC plus FDA, which is basically Fauci...... and minions, were motivated solely by Fauci's ego and his cover up regarding gain-of-function research and support. Fauci is literally what would happen if Dr. Evil ran the CDC.

Biden, being the most stupid and senile President we've ever had, put all his political eggs in one basket, defeating the Wuflu. A supremely unreasonable goal since no one has ever been able to halt or stop a pandemic. Virus come and go and they mutate and they travel around and they come back and eventually, they all just become a common cold. No one has ever interrupted that cycle.

Even for all our years of taking flu shots and that's been going on for almost 20 years now, no one has ever defeated the seasonal flu. Every year, the flu still rips through nursing homes, hospitals, day cares, maternity wards killing the very sick, the very old and the very young. Biden certainly wasn't going to be the guy at the top that finally fought a pandemic and won.

Also, all Biden's (Ron Klain's) advisors on the subject are either government bureaucrats that work for Fauci or they are left wing radicals that say science a lot but don't have any idea what it means but they do know they love authoritarianism...... and they really, really love scaring the public, accruing power, making life difficult for conservative Americans and especially and most importantly, destroying capitalism and punching middle America in the face as much as possible for all our crimes and sins and intolerances and other left wing mirages.

The basic problem with all Democrat voters, is they are hopelessly and incorrigibly and utterly stupid. They rely on group think in everything they do but they desperately want to believe that, they are smart, open minded, sophisticated, cosmopolitan, kind and know things. They are none of those things but they really really think they are all of those things. Thus, this whole thing just flatters their egos and their perception of themselves too.

The only way we could have avoided the pandemic of the jab, is if Trump got elected. It's also the only way we could have avoided a depression, inflation but not school closings. Teacher's unions were going to close schools come hell or high water because what's really going on is teachers and school administrators really hate kids and don't want to babysit. They think they are underpaid, overworked professionals and really, they should be lecturing parents on how to be parents. So, that was going to happen anyway.

In short, America is doomed unless Democrats start losing again.

1
Plashler 1 point ago +1 / -0

Whether it was a plan from the beginning, as in worked out in detail before the appearance of corona, is debatable. But that the actors you mention recognized the opportunity, and deliberately and carefully worked to exploit it, is certain.

Yes, democrats, and their pretentiousness and fetish for totalitarianism, are the drivers of all of the disasters of the past two years, and the most crucial of them are the media. Without an aggressive leftist media, none of it could've reached this level, the election, corona, the border, blm, everything. Unless we can fix the stranglehold of the media, the political questions are irrelevant.

1
Smurfection 1 point ago +1 / -0

Conservatives need to build our own media and just ignore Fake News entirely. We also need to vote out Republican politicians, within reason, that bother with any Fake News. The entire reason why there are so many RINOs is because they are desperately trying to either be left alone by Fake News Inc or they're trying to get good press from Fake News by acting like squishes.

I think there was a Great Reset Plan prior to 2020, even 2019. I think that's clear but I don't know if they meant to do this by causing a pandemic or in the event of a pandemic or to even just make up a pandemic. All I know is that in the event of a civilizational collapse due to a Great Die Off of the jabbed, I'm going to spend the rest of my life ..........

6
CIAagent 6 points ago +20 / -14

This is a LARP.

There will be no mass deaths among the jabbed.

Edit: for the faggots, this post says 70% of the workforce will be dead in a few years. That's my definition of mass deaths. We all know that's retarded. The reason the vax b/s has continued is because it's a small fraction of a percent of recipients who have experienced material adverse reactions. It's still an unacceptable number, but it's not so large that they can't get away with hiding the truth from the masses. No one will ever get redpilled on this. Not dooming, just stating the obvious.

21
HorsePaste4U 21 points ago +24 / -3

thank you mr pfizer

1
CIAagent 1 point ago +9 / -8

“Just two more weeks” I’m sure

12
WinstonSmith1984 12 points ago +12 / -0

Sentence 1 agree.

Sentence 2 disagree, or at least need definition of "mass.". The jabs will kill more people with no comorbidities than covid itself within a few years, if not the next year

9
Dunkin4COVAIDS 9 points ago +9 / -0

In a "mass shooting" it's 4 or more. I'd consider the ~20K listed in VAERS as mass death by vaccine, because that's a fuck load of people. It's the equivalent of multiple rural towns just wiped out of existence. It could also just easily be referred to as a massacre.

4
WinstonSmith1984 4 points ago +4 / -0

Agree with everything you said; was questioning CIA agent's definition, and assertion "There will be no mass deaths among the jabbed" with which I disagree.

2
CIAagent 2 points ago +2 / -0

According to the LARP it's "70% of the workforce will be dead in a few years"

Everyone outside of 4chan knows that's bullshit

2
WinstonSmith1984 2 points ago +2 / -0

Thanks for clarifying (although I don't consider myself a homosexual)

8
PresElectKekPede 8 points ago +8 / -0

Life expectancy 3-5 years after myocarditis is 56%-83%. There will be death just not an overwhelming amount.

7
King4 7 points ago +8 / -1

"there will be death... just not an overhwleming amount"

Let's do some math here, shall we? (I'm doing this live... so I'm not even pre-checking my math to see if my point is pro-found... I might just end up self-owning myself, here...)

60% of the world has been vaxed with at least one dose. Let say these numbers are inflated by 25%. Okay so 60% of 8 billion (world population) is 4.8 Billon. 75% of 4.8 Billion (acocunted for 25% inflation) is 3.6 billion.

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations

Usually about 2/3 of people have gotten 2 doses/More of the jab. So 66.7% of 3.6 billion is 2.4 Billion of the population have received the full vaccine injection for the Fauci Virus.

Let's just 1% of vaccine suffer dehabilitating adverse effections like you just shared. So 1% of 2.4 Billion is... 24 Million.

Let's say in the next 5 years. 25% will die because of those adverse effections. 25% of 24 Million is... 6 Million.

is 6 million deaths not an overhwelming body count? You be the judge.

6
Dunkin4COVAIDS 6 points ago +6 / -0

IMO, 10 deaths due to the vaccine are too many. It should have been immediately discontinued when it hit 100. The ~20k that are associated with the vaccine is overwhelming and far too many to continue acting like it's not that big of a deal.

2
PresElectKekPede 2 points ago +2 / -0

Fantastic breakdown.

6 million deaths worldwide is staggering but it won’t be attributed to the vaccine. They’re already blaming global warming for heart issues. Even 1 death of someone who didn’t want it but was coerced into it is too much.

I hope I’m wrong and the people responsible will be Nuremburg’d but I won’t hold my breath.

1
CIAagent 1 point ago +2 / -1

It's a small fraction of a percent who get debilitating adverse reactions. Still unacceptable, but your assumptions are garbage in -> garbage out.

We will not get anywhere near that number of deaths.

The Black Swan event is if the leaky jabs create a deadly mutation. Then we're all fucked.

-5
deleted -5 points ago +2 / -7
-6
deleted -6 points ago +1 / -7
2
27Sandino 2 points ago +2 / -0

how do i get my own fanclub to follow me around?

5
Kamalas_a_Bitch 5 points ago +5 / -0

The deaths will never be officially tied to the vaxx, just as they are not with other vaccines

2
Kanan_Jarrus 2 points ago +2 / -0

If it lets the insurance companies dodge a payout I bet it will.

1
NOTWOKE 1 point ago +1 / -0

There already is.

4
Kavvfefe 4 points ago +4 / -0

The experiment was falsely advertised as safe, effective & mandatory... I smell massive fraud tort suits

1
Plashler 1 point ago +1 / -0

Against whom? The pharma industry never advertised it, all the propaganda was from goverment agents and media shills. That was the reason for the fake "approval" of a treatment which was never made available.

Every part of the distribution chain is explicitly immune by law, hospitals, doctors, pharmacies, etc. Maybe you could sue the cdc, but they can claim they were just giving advice based on available "research", good luck proving it wasn't "reasonable".

3
muhpeachmint3 3 points ago +3 / -0

This "vaccine" crap is how we end up with Universal Government led healthcare ... everyone who took the jab is going to DEMAND that someone else pay for their own foolishness and folly by saying, "I only did this because YOU TOLD ME TO ! This is YOUR FAULT !!!"

3
V2021 3 points ago +10 / -7

Get this larp faggotry the hell out of here.

Fucking retarded.

3
ArizonaDesertRat2021 3 points ago +3 / -0

‘Suicide”…like Vince Foster?

3
UndercoverSpez 3 points ago +4 / -1

Fake and gay

3
JiggsawCalrissian 3 points ago +3 / -0

Oh ya

Heads will roll

2
yakkayakka 2 points ago +2 / -0

turn your community styling off and downvote shit like this. So dumb

2
SgtThomasHighway 2 points ago +2 / -0

I call BS on this. But could you imagine a more enraging catalyst for s*** hitting the fan?

2
artifex_mundi_x 2 points ago +2 / -0

Fear porn lol.

2
Moon 2 points ago +2 / -0

lol, false.

2
hansgruber7 2 points ago +2 / -0

Fake and Gay.

2
DERedRider 2 points ago +2 / -0

A french court held pretty much this exact thing in one case. They didn't call it suicide, they equated it with suicide, a voluntary act that could likely result in death. They did deny the victims coverage because the vaxx was experimental and their policy didn't cover experimental medical procedures.

2
RiverFenix 2 points ago +2 / -0

I see a lot of people calling bullshit, which may be true in this case....

but do people honestly believe insurance company aren't a scam set up and knowingly one day will be unable to pay out large sums if a large portion of the country were affected?

Let's say you're X company insuring X-hundreds of people in a city. Said city is catastrophically destroyed and everyone dies, except family living elsewhere.

insurance Company X would have to pay out likely more than they have.

They'd go bankrupt and never pay anyone. This is all part of the plan.

2
Nimblenavigator1 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is “my uncle works for Nintendo” level nonsense. The second an insurer tries to pull this off, they’d be taken to court and hit with treble damages so quickly your head would spin.

2
HockeyMom4Trump 2 points ago +2 / -0

Fake

Suicide is covered, usually after a certain time.

2
ivana-humpalot 2 points ago +2 / -0

fingers crossed.

1
GrayManNumber333 1 point ago +1 / -0

Fake. Suicide is covered by most life insurance after 2 years.

1
TheOne555 1 point ago +1 / -0

20 years.

LOLOLOL

What a load of shit

1
refresco 1 point ago +1 / -0

Fake and gay

1
LoobintheToobin 1 point ago +1 / -0

Italy responded to autopsy, won’t help due to no legal mandate. https://patriots.win/p/140vszPVg4/-italy-after-a-death-due-to-covi/c/

Life insurance not received because the Vax was not fda approved: https://greatawakening.win/p/12igvj1OuO/crazy-if-true/c/

Businesses are taking out insurance on the employees they require inoculated in case they die. https://patriots.win/p/140voSxpQp/robert-malone-received-a-letter-/c/

Early on there were anecdotal reports that insurance companies have stipulations and rules about suicide that they don’t have to pay out. With so much unexpected early deaths How could the bidens tension viable if they do? Get the right autopsy, prove the truth, and all avenues for assistance will close shut tightly.

1
ConsrvspkgNJ 1 point ago +1 / -0

I call bullshit. I am a 26 year insurance agent in Life and Health and this doesn't even come close to sounding real. Why? Because for starters the Suicide Clause is 2 years from contract date. Not to mention the same people who provide the McCarren-Ferguson protection are the same ones who say the vax is cool. No, the carriers will indeed be on the hook for these claims.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
iSignedUpForThis 1 point ago +1 / -0

LARP!

1
nightingalemori 1 point ago +1 / -0

dose anyone have hard edvince of this or know of a company who we can call/email to find out?

1
Space_Force 1 point ago +1 / -0

No way to know if that's legit or not. I personally think that sooner than later you are going to hear the phrase "Well, no one forced you to get vaccinated," repeated over and over again.

1
Greenhills 1 point ago +1 / -0

So the vaxxed have to pay extra and vaxxed get no coverage. Smart people running these places.

1
DuxBellorum 1 point ago +2 / -1

That woman's name? Alberta Einstein.

1
OneBigMaga 1 point ago +1 / -0

I always trust anonymous sources. They are always correct.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
PonySoldier66 1 point ago +1 / -0

well there you have it, his sister said so.

1
Dudemanfoo 1 point ago +1 / -0

calling bullshit.

If that were to happen, NO ONE would ever pay for insurance again and the entire actuarial house of cards would come tumbling down...

Not that the world would not be MUCH better off without insurance companies raping everyone... but they just ain't that stupid

1
Shadowflare 1 point ago +1 / -0

Gonna announce in 2 week, super pinky swear!

1
Markstarr85 1 point ago +1 / -0

I was thinking to myself the other day when ppl suicide for insurance they don’t get paid out. So why not get COVID first

1
Cuz99 1 point ago +1 / -0

This will never happen. Stupid. If they did this then how do you expect them to get new customers on new policies. They are a business. Nevers gonna happen

1
Plashler 1 point ago +1 / -0

Have you ever dealt with serious insurance claims? The insurance industry are the most underhanded scumbags on Earth, they will go to any lengths to deny claims, and they'll fuck anybody they can. They're still in business because of lobbying, favorable legislation, and because people need it, not because of good business practices.

That said, you're right this won't happen - if the claims turn out to be substantial, congress will bail them out or get the taxpayer to foot the bill.

1
dudemanbroguysir 1 point ago +1 / -0

Not suicide, but I know my policy has exclusions for stuff like skydiving, racing, padi/ etc. It also has exclusions for engaging in experimental medical procedures and treatment. The insurance company won’t be held liable for risks you take outside of those policy exclusions. Most policies are very different so check on yours if you have one or call your company if you have questions. Like, “Will my universal Type A” insurance help me or my family if I am killed or injured from the clot shot?”. In my case the answer is now. I have an exclusion for experimental medication in my policy.

Edit: spelling injred to injured

1
Brownwaterboys 1 point ago +1 / -0

If this WAS real the insurance companies would just go to the Government and ask for a bailout first- get tons of tax payer money

1
JimJordan2024 1 point ago +2 / -1

"About to announce" "Very soon" "News about to break"

This site is literally "just two more weeks" with this shit. Give hard evidence or fuck off at this point.

1
sickofaltspin 1 point ago +1 / -0

L A R P

A

R

P

My uncle, that works at Nintendo, told me if you beat Mike Tyson in Punch Out, you get to play back through as Iron Mike.

1
spuger 1 point ago +1 / -0

It is possible that insurance companies will argue that vax deaths are suicide - they will angle for a bail out.

70% of the workforce will not die.

From the data I've seen at my hospital network, the vaccine is about as dangerous as owning motor cycle. That's insanely dangerous for any medical procedure, and makes this the most dangerous "vaccine" by a factor of about 1,000, but it's looking like the worst case scenario of a mass die-off won't come to pass.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
DudeNoOne 1 point ago +1 / -0

X

0
MAGA_Man_DonnyT 0 points ago +1 / -1

What kind of faggot believes this is true

0
deleted 0 points ago +3 / -3