5 ms·

Notice I was sure to include ‘revival of corporate R & D divisions’ in the argument? Bell Labs is the archetype - if corporations can do a better job of applie

Notice I was sure to include ‘revival of corporate R & D divisions’ in the argument? Bell Labs is the archetype - if corporations can do a better job of applied R & D, let them. If corporations are upset about publicly funded research generating open-source discoveries that upset the monopolistic apple cart, that’s not an argument about improving efficiency - that’s an argument about maximizing profits and investor return, not for efficient new drug discovery or old drug repurposing. The real question is, what is the metric of ‘success’ - improved public health for the entire population at low cost, or bloated returns for pharmaceutical investors?

parineum 4mo ago
> The real question is, what is the metric of ‘success’ - improved public health for the entire population at low cost, or bloated returns for pharmaceutical investors? This is a false dichotomy and this kind of zero sum thinking is exactly the root of so much misunderstanding of economics that's all the rage these days (and probably forever). Wealth is created by innovation, not transfered. "Rent seeking" is wealth transfer but most companies provide a service that is more valuable than what exists without them. The goal of capitalism is to allow the capitalist to increase their profits by improving the public good. "Public good" being measured by what people are willing to spend their money on. It isn't to increase the capatalists profits at all costs. The entire idea is built on exploiting the capitalist's impulse to increase profits to also serve the public good.
- yndoendo 4mo ago
  I hate to break it to you. Private Equity does not care about the common good, only profits. They only bow to increase price and out side of medicine, reduce the qualifying of the product. Want common good, start creating disdain for the wealths in societies.
  - parineum 4mo ago
    > Private Equity does not care about the common good, only profits. Go back and read what I wrote. The point of capitalism is to align the profit motive of capitalists with the common good. It's not to give free reign to capitalists to do whatever they want at all costs.
    - yndoendo 4mo ago
      Not according to the Friedman doctrine, which more and more companies are latching onto under capitalism [0]. I would also add that rejecting PE as not being apart of capitalism is rejecting reality. It is here and unfortunately to stay. Wealthy prefer to extract as much wealth from a brand, product, or service versus keep it around in good condition. Billionaires are not created by being supporters of the common good. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman_doctrine
      - parineum 4mo ago
        > Billionaires are not created by being supporters of the common good. Yes they are. Name a billionaire who didn't make their money providing a service people voluntarily paid for.
        yndoendo 4mo ago
        Common good != making money! Exploitation of working class != common good! Replacing product quality indigence with poor quality and substitutions != common good! Hording money != common good. Friedman doctrine != common good. Power to harm the producer and consumer based on product and service provider != common good. Didn't know price fixing is now classified as common good. Billionaires exist by the exploitation of the common good. How many billionaires push against living wages vs support them for all their employees for all their businesses?
        parineum 4mo ago
        > Common good != making money! Providing valuable goods and services for people who voluntarily exchange their money is very good for everyone. > Exploitation of working class Paying your employees mutually agreed upon salaries seems good though, right? > Hording money != common good Who's hoarding money? > How many billionaires push against living wages vs support them for all their employees for all their businesses? Setting government policy isn't the job of billionaires. People speak with their wallets and would rather have the prices for goods go down (something that historically and consistently happens) rather than see their own wages rise. Which is the tradeoff. You can't suddenly raise wages without seeing a commensurate price rise and then your back to square one. Most businesses run on very thin margins due to intense competition.
- photochemsyn 4mo ago
  [dead]
  - parineum 4mo ago
    You're not reading what I'm writing. Capitalism isn't there to serve capitalists so citing what a capitalist wants and saying it's a flaw with capitalism doesn't make sense. Capitalism is all about providing the right incentives to capitalists so that what's good for them is good for everyone. > ‘Is curing patients a sustainable business model?’ The goal of capitalism is to make the answer to that question "Yes".

parineum 4mo ago

> The real question is, what is the metric of ‘success’ - improved public health for the entire population at low cost, or bloated returns for pharmaceutical investors? This is a false dichotomy and this kind of zero sum thinking is exactly the root of so much misunderstanding of economics that's all the rage these days (and probably forever). Wealth is created by innovation, not transfered. "Rent seeking" is wealth transfer but most companies provide a service that is more valuable than what exists without them. The goal of capitalism is to allow the capitalist to increase their profits by improving the public good. "Public good" being measured by what people are willing to spend their money on. It isn't to increase the capatalists profits at all costs. The entire idea is built on exploiting the capitalist's impulse to increase profits to also serve the public good.

yndoendo 4mo ago
I hate to break it to you. Private Equity does not care about the common good, only profits. They only bow to increase price and out side of medicine, reduce the qualifying of the product. Want common good, start creating disdain for the wealths in societies.
- parineum 4mo ago
  > Private Equity does not care about the common good, only profits. Go back and read what I wrote. The point of capitalism is to align the profit motive of capitalists with the common good. It's not to give free reign to capitalists to do whatever they want at all costs.
  - yndoendo 4mo ago
    Not according to the Friedman doctrine, which more and more companies are latching onto under capitalism [0]. I would also add that rejecting PE as not being apart of capitalism is rejecting reality. It is here and unfortunately to stay. Wealthy prefer to extract as much wealth from a brand, product, or service versus keep it around in good condition. Billionaires are not created by being supporters of the common good. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman_doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedman_doctrine
    - parineum 4mo ago
      > Billionaires are not created by being supporters of the common good. Yes they are. Name a billionaire who didn't make their money providing a service people voluntarily paid for.
      - yndoendo 4mo ago
        Common good != making money! Exploitation of working class != common good! Replacing product quality indigence with poor quality and substitutions != common good! Hording money != common good. Friedman doctrine != common good. Power to harm the producer and consumer based on product and service provider != common good. Didn't know price fixing is now classified as common good. Billionaires exist by the exploitation of the common good. How many billionaires push against living wages vs support them for all their employees for all their businesses?
        parineum 4mo ago
        > Common good != making money! Providing valuable goods and services for people who voluntarily exchange their money is very good for everyone. > Exploitation of working class Paying your employees mutually agreed upon salaries seems good though, right? > Hording money != common good Who's hoarding money? > How many billionaires push against living wages vs support them for all their employees for all their businesses? Setting government policy isn't the job of billionaires. People speak with their wallets and would rather have the prices for goods go down (something that historically and consistently happens) rather than see their own wages rise. Which is the tradeoff. You can't suddenly raise wages without seeing a commensurate price rise and then your back to square one. Most businesses run on very thin margins due to intense competition.
photochemsyn 4mo ago
[dead]
- parineum 4mo ago
  You're not reading what I'm writing. Capitalism isn't there to serve capitalists so citing what a capitalist wants and saying it's a flaw with capitalism doesn't make sense. Capitalism is all about providing the right incentives to capitalists so that what's good for them is good for everyone. > ‘Is curing patients a sustainable business model?’ The goal of capitalism is to make the answer to that question "Yes".