2 ms·
You're right. The pharmaceutical exploitation that got the spotlight shined on him in the first place was reprehensible, to put it mildly. But there are an awf
by thaumaturgy 9y ago
You're right. The pharmaceutical exploitation that got the spotlight shined on him in the first place was reprehensible, to put it mildly.
But there are an awful lot of other crooks out there taking advantage of as many or more people, and often getting away with it with very little consequence.
I may not like him, but being dislikable shouldn't have that much effect on punishment.
- throwaway0255 9y ago> The pharmaceutical exploitation that got the spotlight shined on him in the first place was reprehensible, to put it mildly. Can you explain why? If you think it's immoral for the profit motive to be in play when it comes to healthcare, then fine. But to single him out like he's some kind of extreme amoral outlier or something seems really unfair. Most people got the drug for free or at an extreme discount, and he spent all the profits on drug research. What he did is pretty much how the entire pharmaceutical industry works.
- fjsolwmv 9y agoHe spent some of the profits on a WuTang album