Clott Adams - 'The Anti-Vax People Appear To Be The Winners'

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.

Click here to see all the comments (33).

[–] • 0 pt

Another thing is that with the R&D being paid for by governments, the pharma companies should have (as a condition of their contract) been forced to supply the therapy at cost, with maybe a tiny fixed profit margin. The pharma companies took zero risk and gained patented therapies that they could sell at massive profit to a captive and forced market.

They not only killed people, they made a killing doing it.

parent
link

[–] • 1 pt

(edited )

Well if the entire program had been on the up and up in all respects, I would expect them to be able to make a profit. They are, after all, companies, and companies have to make profits to stay in business.

Granted, an exorbitant profit on the backs of people in a pandemic is something that I would take issue with, though we’d have to come to some agreement on what “exorbitant” actually means as without some agreed-upon definition, that concept is ambiguous and subjective. The argument for most cutting edge treatments being so expensive is that the R&D money is fronted by the company, thus they need to both make up for what they gave up in the initial investment PLUS turn a profit. I have to think that this is a legitimate argument in general, though I’m sure there is and has been gouging in many cases past. But then, as you pointed out, the government paid for the R&D allegedly, so the normal formula that’s applied shouldn’t be applied here. And then there are already laws against gouging in emergency situations for all sorts of other things, so that same principle should have also applied here.

In any case, all I’m saying is that I’m in no way against making a profit for providing a service that people willingly pay for and where they actually get what they were sold…but that is NOT what happened here..well, the profit part definitely happened…but it was fraudulent from the beginning and add to that the fact that people were coerced into it and many have died and will die as a result.

So, these fuckers are still defending their position based on a false premise (that being that all this shit was on the up and up), but this goes way beyond the scenario where I paid $1 for 5 apples and some of them had worms…that would be bad, but it’s nothing compared to what these fuckers have actually done, though they're essentially trying to make such a ludicrous equivocation…no, they’ve done far worse: they’ve violated people’s human rights and actually killed many of them, and then lied and continue to lie in order to keep committing the crime.

Well if the entire program had been on the up and up in all respects, I would expect them to be able to make a profit. They are, after all, companies, and companies have to make profits to stay in business. Granted, an exorbitant profit on the backs of people in a pandemic is something that I would take issue with, though we’d have to come to some agreement on what “exorbitant” actually means as without some agreed-upon definition, that concept is ambiguous and subjective. The argument for most cutting edge treatments being so expensive is that the R&D money is fronted by the company, thus they need to both make up for what they gave up in the initial investment PLUS turn a profit. I have to think that this is a legitimate argument in general, though I’m sure there is and has been gouging in many cases past. But then, as you pointed out, the government paid for the R&D allegedly, so the normal formula that’s applied shouldn’t be applied here. And then there are already laws against gouging in emergency situations for all sorts of other things, so that same principle should have also applied here. In any case, all I’m saying is that I’m in no way against making a profit for providing a service that people willingly pay for and where they actually get what they were sold…but that is NOT what happened here..well, the profit part definitely happened…but it was fraudulent from the beginning and add to that the fact that people were coerced into it and many have died and will die as a result. So, these fuckers are still defending their position based on a false premise (that being that all this shit was on the up and up), but this goes way beyond the scenario where I paid $1 for 5 apples and some of them had worms…that would be bad, but it’s nothing compared to what these fuckers have actually done, though they're essentially trying to make such a ludicrous equivocation…no, they’ve done far worse: they’ve violated people’s human rights and actually killed many of them, and then lied and continue to lie in order to keep committing the crime.

parent
link