3 ms·
There are people who are evil. I don't care what economic language in which they couch it. They deserve what they get -- and I hope it is coming to them, soon
by pasbesoin 11y ago
There are people who are evil. I don't care what economic language in which they couch it. They deserve what they get -- and I hope it is coming to them, soon. (This is not a threat, just a strongly held sentiment.)
P.S. I hope that micro-laboratories and production diversification will soon put a final "paid" to such exploitative strategies and tactics. Yeah, the "risk" of a chemistry and biologics lab in every back yard and basement... I'm increasingly of the sentiment that it is less than the increasing risk of autocratic and monopolistic control of centralized production and distribution.
This is a somewhat surprising development in my own attitude, to me. As I recall observing all the bone-headed and sometimes downright risky and uncaring behavior of e.g. chemistry students, including potential majors -- and some of the instructors -- back in college. Part of me is strongly concerned about keeping them from poisoning others and whatever environment they find themselves in.
Nonetheless, as I observe an increasing momentum towards artificial scarcity and profiteering -- often by people with no credit for making or enabling the original discoveries and creations -- I see decentralization as the only effective response.
I, and many others, tried "playing by the rules." Turns out, they've been increasingly rigged, and us, screwed. I'm not the only one deciding, "you have to take care of yourself." Not just in general, but seemingly in every aspect.
- oconnor663 11y agoI think if we depend on people to Be Good when there are big financial incentives not to, we're already screwed. We have to look at why the incentives are bad. > With the price now high, other companies could conceivably make generic copies, since patents have long expired. One factor that could discourage that option is that Daraprim’s distribution is now tightly controlled, making it harder for generic companies to get the samples they need for the required testing. This should've been the second paragraph of the article, not buried near the bottom. The author seems to be expecting a system to make legal monopolies behave nicely. Instead we should stop creating legal monopolies.
- angersock 11y agoWell, these people are playing by the rules--the rules of the free market as rigged with regulation. If we as a society had said "You know, it's more important that we have a secure, available supply of this drug than to be friendly to corporate interests" and had acted accordingly, this would've gone a bit differently. As it is, the "legacy support" for pharmaceuticals is probably not going to be that large as new and improved things come out.