4 ms·
Some people see this as corruption, but the correct way to see this is as an opportunity to get rich people to give money to everyone else. When rich people ar
by twblalock 6y ago
Some people see this as corruption, but the correct way to see this is as an opportunity to get rich people to give money to everyone else.
When rich people are trying to give away money, we should try to direct that money to good causes. We have an opportunity to do that here.
What would you prefer: that rich people give away money, or that they keep all of it to themselves? If they want to give it away we should certainly be interested in how to direct it. If they keep it to themselves, nobody benefits except them.
- aqme28 6y agoI think the fundamental issue here is that they're not giving their money away for free. They're taking life-saving medication from people who need it more. People will die preventable deaths when we auction off our supply.
- tarboreus 6y agoThat doesn't really make sense. There has to be a point, and likely it's a pretty low figure, at which the life-saving value of getting and using money offsets whatever downside comes with giving a rich person the vaccine. Obviously receiving $100 billion for one vial of vaccine would be an appropriate tradeoff, you can save any number of lives with that money. Once you acknowledge this, it's also obvious that a much smaller amount would also save lives. An auction would likely kick up low to mid five figures, maybe even six figures, and the utility of that money is almost certainly higher than the single vial. This is even before you consider that the vaccine will wind up in the hands of rich people anyway, with no additional utility to anyone.