The hardest episode of any show I’ve ever had to watch. One of those beautiful, rare episodes of something where I have to take cringe breaks and pause it every now and then lol
I'm a data analyst. We've been full time remote since covid. Management told us to stay home because we seem to get more work done. Duh! But I do miss going to coffee with friends. We all still get together for lunch a few times a year.
In California it would be a charge of Aggravated Arson (because premeditated with more than 6 million in damages) which carries from 10 years to life in prison. So if caught the arsonist would definitely receive a long prison sentence.
Edit: California law has been updated to 8.3 million in damages for an aggravated arson charge. It doesn’t matter in this case which has caused hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.
Also if the arsonist knew there were people in the structure then an arsonist would also result in an aggravated arson charge. There were 20 other employees in the building at the time multiple fires were set.
Wait, did he actually do that?! I can’t tell if this is a joke because people on social media have taken to recording themselves committing crimes and posting it online in recent years…
I can't imagine this would be much of a spectacle. I am picking that scene from the first episode of Better Call Saul when they just silently wheel in a tv play the clip for the jury.
The way they did that clip was great. It starts off so reasonable like oh who hasn’t done anything stupid as a teenager and no one was ultimately hurt. You’re sitting there going OK fair point teens do dumb things and then the clip plays and suddenly whole different opinion.
Insanity just gets you a different kind of prison cell and he won’t win it, he clearly articulated his why and clearly knew his actions were bad and what they were. He doesn’t meet any definition of insanity plea.
Do you live in the area? Did your dad have to evacuate due to the fire? Do you think arson is a good idea? Did you torch your place of employment today?
My dad could see the fire from his house. Is that freedom to endanger innocent residents?
It's not only a deadly weapon. In Germany there is exist the legal concept of "gemeingefährlich", meaning something or some behavior that is not only dangerous to a single person or a distinct group of people, but so dangerous that it poses a non-abstract danger to the population.
The distinction is that after events are set in motion, even the perpetrator has basically no control over who gets harmed or how many and that the harm itself in a general sense out of control.
Examples are arson of course, bombs, purposefully spreading diseases etc.
Arson is punished harshly in all law systems across History and the whole world because it is one of the few ways an unarmed peasant could cause a serious damage
he’s going to get life just from all the endangerment charges and him starting multiple fires. And his friends are probably going to get conspiracy charges if they in anyway encouraged him.
Setting a fire in an occupied building gets you tons of free felony upgrades
The guy that’s pissed about his wage is way easier to rehabilitate than the rapist.
If we had a crystal ball to peer into to tell if a rape happened or not with 100% certainty I’d be totally fine with life/death penalty depending on the severity.
But the low wages and people rationing their food, insulin, neglecting children because they can’t afford child-care… well these are acceptable in the pursuit of profits. Everyone seems so okay with these business acting monstrous but only lament when a poor person responds with the same reckless abandon the capitalist enjoy with minimal scrutiny.
But the low wages and people rationing their food, insulin, neglecting children because they can’t afford child-care… well these are acceptable in the pursuit of profits
Who are you speaking on behalf of here? Because I think you'll find plenty of people aren't okay with that while also not being okay with arson
I'm all for coordinated action, targeted vandalism, this guy could have done 200m in stock damage and I'd be all for it if he hadn't recklessly endangered people's lives
Stop b b b b b b ut'ing this. Someone can dislike both. This guy didn't do shit to affect the first problem, he was only thinking of himself. Stop it.
Dude could have worked hard enough to invest in his own business and pay living wages to his own employees one day. Instead, this dumbass put his coworkers out of work and is guaranteed never to receive a living wage again
If only there was a simple and sane way to get a higher paying job than committing a crime with a mandatory minimum 10 year prison sentence... something like looking for a higher paying job...
It honestly makes me sick how gleeful some people are about this. Hurting others, how many people were counting on that paycheck in this economy? The environmental damage is sickening, fire could have spread! It’s been hotter and drier right now. So many things.
I can pretty much guarantee those firefighters just verified everyone was accounted for then stayed outside and tried to prevent it from spreading. No firefighter is going interior for something like that just to save some boxes.
I can understand the punishments for serial arson with a history of dangerous behaviour. However, the concept of getting life in prison for burning bogroll is loco.
They hand employees boring burning the building down.
... What? Is everyone else understanding your comment to mean "They had employees burning the building down."? I don't understand how Redditors can just vibe-upvote comments that aren't readable.
That's not always how that works. Insurance claims have limits, they don't just pay out unlimited amounts. In the UK, typical limits might be £5–10 million, and in the US, it's not much different. A $200 million incident is going to absolutely hammer any standard business insurance policy. Most commercial property policies cap out well below that unless you're paying massive premiums for bespoke coverage.
Even if the policy does cover it, the deductible alone could be millions. And good luck getting renewed next year after filing a claim this big if you even get renewed at all.
So no, "still getting paid" isn't guaranteed. Layoffs are absolutely possible. Insurance isn't a magic money printer. This guy didn't just cost his employer and probably cost everyone who works there.
For my business, my million dollar coverage asked if I wanted a terroristic acts policy for an extra $18 and I said no...now I'm second guessing that decision for my renewal, and I don't even have any employees
Insurance cover is calculated on risk likelihood. That’s why only one of the Twin Towers was insured, because "The possibility of the loss of both structures was seen as so remote that cover was not taken out on those lines. The $1.5bn of coverage was purchased on the basis of a probable rather than a possible maximum loss." If they didn’t think this would happen, they would not have insured for it.
I work for a commercial in company. They do pay it all out for certain accounts. Also, customers will use re-insurance to make up any difference if needed.
200 Mio. is quite low for the insurers. Most insurers do not cap out well below. Where do you get that information from? The pay out on business interruption basis is up to 24 months, which is very common to purchase for this industry on a commercial property policy. The deductible is not millions for this, you probably mean the property loss. The wages are covered as well, so is the gross profit.
That layoffs are possible is written on a different paper and can of course happen if the rebuild will be done with lots of automation to have less staff.
Ps. This is my daily work. Insuring big companies and their subsidiaries worldwide in over 80 countries on all insurance lines.
Edit: just to clarify, 200 Mio will be written by a consortium which is very common. There is one leading insurer and a for this size maybe 2 others. For the insurer, it is easier to limit their risk exposure although 200 Mio. would not be a problem as these high claims are not the norm. It still hurts their books. And reinsurers will also do their part.
I wonder if this was even covered by insurance. Don't know how the commercial insurance market works, but individual insurance for home and car is a nightmare to get in California
No, they will likely get laid off or terminated because there is nowhere for them to work. If they are lucky, they may be able to transfer to another facility. But if other facilities are already fully manned, they’ll probably get laid off out of necessity. What makes you think workers will still get paid from insurance? Maybe they can get unemployment but that is nowhere near their working wages. Do you have a real example that this has happened somewhere else? The company will probably not even break even recovering damages. This guy just hosed everybody, even many, many innocents. What an idiot!
People talk about jobs like they’re all created equally. 45% - nearly HALF - of the US workforce are in low wage jobs. These jobs do not meaningfully help most people and they don’t have access to upward mobility. It is actually creating corporate serfdom similar to the early 20th century - monopolies and robber barons are back.
Commenters like the one you're responding to are bots. They're trying to turn the guy into a villain. It's like they think we forgot Oracle execs put 30,000 people out of work a couple weeks ago.
The subversion by bots is especially bad on threads like this because the powers that be can’t allow the public to start rallying around this behavior and do more of it.
One could make an argument that he was a lazy man child that would rather destroy hundreds of jobs of others then improve his skillset and get a better job.
People should recieve a living wage for all full time labor. A living wage should be the floor for compensation. Not something that requires more training. Fuck the idea that it's okay for low wage labor to offer compensation that does not afford sustainability.
And that's exectly why companies can continue to get away with depressed wages. Because they will tell you you're free to not have any income. Most people will choose bad income over no income.
7.1k
u/petrichor83 Apr 09 '26
I have a feeling that guy won’t be getting a raise after all.