02-05-2016, 02:16 PM
(02-05-2016, 01:59 PM)Benton Wrote: We're getting OT here (or maybe not), but the nature of capitalism is there's never going to be an ethical line.
In Shkreli's case, people are pissed because he upped a necessary drug price to where it most likely effected those who took it, and possibly prevented them from taking it. Where's the outrage over SAT/ACT prep course markup (2,000-4000%) that could make the difference in someone getting a life changing education? What about bypass surgery (1,000%)? Prescription drugs average around 3,000% but nobody bats an eye. Internet service — more and more necessary to education and business — in some areas has a 5,000% markup.
Some of your comparisons don't hold water because they aren't in regards to saving someone's life...their actual life not quality of life. As for the surgery that is service that the cost can shift as the price to pay people qualified to perform it can go up. The issue in this case, with this specific drug, is nothing changed other than a guy came in trying to milk it for as much possible as quickly as he can. When we allow things such as patents, then we also must have checks and balances to protect the consumer. Patents (especially in pharmaceuticals) are counter intuitive to free market philosophy because they prevent the competition that allows for the true value to be assigned to a good. If we eliminated patents I'd be okay with letting this guy charge whatever he wanted because competitors would come in and we would have stabilization, but since we already artificially manipulate free market then there must be checks in place to stop these things from happening.
