3 ms·

The analogy that the people in the US are “employees” of pharm companies is the wrong analogy. There is no obligation here. Companies price discriminate all th

by Axsuul 5y ago

The analogy that the people in the US are “employees” of pharm companies is the wrong analogy. There is no obligation here. Companies price discriminate all the time. It’s capitalism. I run a SaaS and offer lower pricing to businesses from lower cost countries. But it doesn’t mean I’m subsidizing costs thanks to richer countries. It’s so I’m not leaving money on the table.

actually_a_dog 5y ago
Have you ever stopped to consider for even one second that maybe capitalism is the problem? That maybe there should be an obligation? As I said in my other comment, you can't keep squeezing people for more and more and more and expect it to be sustainable. What good are fancy new drugs and treatments when nobody can afford them, even with insurance?
- Axsuul 5y ago
  Would we still have these new drugs without capitalism? There still needs to be incentive and capitalism is the best model we have for that. It's the government that needs to implement policies however to make them more available for everyone. Humans can't be relied upon to develop novel solutions for the good of everyone -- there has to be something in it for them. That's just how they operate unfortunately. Long-term solutions require the right incentives.
  - actually_a_dog 5y ago
    Where's the incentive if people can't afford them? You're thinking too small if you think capitalism is the only system with incentives. You're locked into the idea that capitalism is the only possible economic system, and you can't see that there can be alternatives (a.k.a. "capitalist realism"). Why do you think it's reasonable that we could fix a problem created by capitalism by doing more capitalism? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalist_Realism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalist_Realism

3 ms·

The analogy that the people in the US are “employees” of pharm companies is the wrong analogy. There is no obligation here. Companies price discriminate all th

by Axsuul 5y ago

actually_a_dog 5y ago
Have you ever stopped to consider for even one second that maybe capitalism is the problem? That maybe there should be an obligation? As I said in my other comment, you can't keep squeezing people for more and more and more and expect it to be sustainable. What good are fancy new drugs and treatments when nobody can afford them, even with insurance?
- Axsuul 5y ago
  Would we still have these new drugs without capitalism? There still needs to be incentive and capitalism is the best model we have for that. It's the government that needs to implement policies however to make them more available for everyone. Humans can't be relied upon to develop novel solutions for the good of everyone -- there has to be something in it for them. That's just how they operate unfortunately. Long-term solutions require the right incentives.
  - actually_a_dog 5y ago
    Where's the incentive if people can't afford them? You're thinking too small if you think capitalism is the only system with incentives. You're locked into the idea that capitalism is the only possible economic system, and you can't see that there can be alternatives (a.k.a. "capitalist realism"). Why do you think it's reasonable that we could fix a problem created by capitalism by doing more capitalism? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalist_Realism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalist_Realism