Obviously it would be better in the long-term, global perspective for no one to pay. If no one paid, no one would continue making ransomware. But that requires

Obviously it would be better in the long-term, global perspective for no one to pay. If no one paid, no one would continue making ransomware. But that requires that the everyone hit by ransomware before people give up on making it be willing to sacrifice their own good for the good of those who would be hit after them, since equally obviously it's better for a company to lose $20k than $20MM worth of information. It is very difficult to get people to sacrifice their own good for the good of others in the future, even when that future global good vastly outweighs the present local good. See also: Climate change