3 ms·

From your choice of words one can see that you judge pharma concerns for "generating massive profits" by "taking the world hostage". But nobody has taken anyon

From your choice of words one can see that you judge pharma concerns for "generating massive profits" by "taking the world hostage". But nobody has taken anyone for hostage. You're speculating. And it's a gigantic global health crysis. Nothing bad with pharma solving covid.

noahtallen 6y ago
Nothing bad with pharma solving covid, but surely something bad with pharma solving covid using public money and then not releasing the solution to the public without taking another big fee. (Hypothetically — I’m not saying that’s what happened since I know so little. I’m pointing out a scenario in which pharma would be bad.) And, I would suggest more broadly that profit doesn’t equate with “morally good”. One could argue that under utilitarianism, the ethically “right” thing to do is to give away vaccines, or at least charge only the manufacturing price. Hell, even a dollar per vaccine across even 50% of the world’s population is a ton of money.
- timdaub 6y ago
  Your type of reasoning is the exact problem that we have in politics. Single people think they know better than this genius swarm intelligence that is the market. And then they make stupid rules for everyone. It doesn't matter what is good or bad. Right or wrong. Only the outcome matters. And arguably given the content of the original post, the outcome right now with politics is bad.
  - _Microft 6y ago
    Markets don't just magically work better. Have a look at the harm that fossil fuels can do simply because the costs of these damages were not priced into the cost of fossil fuels.
    - timdaub 6y ago
      Unexpected costs of fossil fuels that cause climate change is a historical failure of regulation (politics) and not markets. Markets are not magic. They're just a tool.
      - _Microft 6y ago
        In this case I do not understand what you are arguing for (or against). "Markets" themselves are the easy part. Regulating them properly is the really difficult part.

noahtallen 6y ago

Nothing bad with pharma solving covid, but surely something bad with pharma solving covid using public money and then not releasing the solution to the public without taking another big fee. (Hypothetically — I’m not saying that’s what happened since I know so little. I’m pointing out a scenario in which pharma would be bad.) And, I would suggest more broadly that profit doesn’t equate with “morally good”. One could argue that under utilitarianism, the ethically “right” thing to do is to give away vaccines, or at least charge only the manufacturing price. Hell, even a dollar per vaccine across even 50% of the world’s population is a ton of money.

timdaub 6y ago
Your type of reasoning is the exact problem that we have in politics. Single people think they know better than this genius swarm intelligence that is the market. And then they make stupid rules for everyone. It doesn't matter what is good or bad. Right or wrong. Only the outcome matters. And arguably given the content of the original post, the outcome right now with politics is bad.
- _Microft 6y ago
  Markets don't just magically work better. Have a look at the harm that fossil fuels can do simply because the costs of these damages were not priced into the cost of fossil fuels.
  - timdaub 6y ago
    Unexpected costs of fossil fuels that cause climate change is a historical failure of regulation (politics) and not markets. Markets are not magic. They're just a tool.
    - _Microft 6y ago
      In this case I do not understand what you are arguing for (or against). "Markets" themselves are the easy part. Regulating them properly is the really difficult part.