@quackquack said
Maybe you have the thick skull so I'll explain it to you.
We won't have vaccines in the future or continued research for a mutating virus if the companies that develop them aren't sufficiently compensated for their product. By refusing to pay for one of the most valuable inventions in a century you have indicated that you don't have an ounce of respect for those who cre ...[text shortened]... , who think they are entitled to life saving medicine without offering to paying a reasonable price.
"We won't have vaccines in the future or continued research for a mutating virus if the companies that develop them aren't sufficiently compensated for their product. "
Companies get a large portion of their research from public grants, especially something that is as urgent as a drug or vaccine. Astra-Zeneca bought the patent for its vaccine from Oxford University which developed it largely with uk taxpayer money.
Thinking that research would simply stop if companies don't get as much profit as they want is just idiotic.
"By refusing to pay for one of the most valuable inventions in a century you have indicated that you don't have an ounce of respect for those who create products that save lives even in a pandemic."
First of all, nobody suggested it be given away for free, just that some of the richest countries support some of the cost AFTER they negotiate a better, fairer price, so that everyone gets vaccinated which helps everyone.
And seeing as much of the research was done by researchers across the world over multiple years it should stand to reason that the entire world gets a say in how it's distributed.
If you think american companies developed drugs on their own, you are a dumbass. Well, you're a dumbass for many other reasons, this would just be the latest.
"Payment for life saving inventions encourages the creation of them."
Yes, like when the inventor of insulin started a company that sold insulin shots for 2 weeks of average worker pay and became a billionaire. Wait, it doesn't sound right, i think I don't remember that correctly. Oh well, he sold it for a sum, right, definitely not 1 dollar. I mean, who would do the decent thing and sell a life saving drug for 1 dollar? That is unheard of.
"And, for the record, no one cares about freeloaders, like yourself, who think they are entitled to life saving medicine without offering to paying a reasonable price."
Actually, you would find that the majority of people agree with me, not you, because the majority of people are actually decent human beings and not ghouls. Canada sells insulin at a reasonable price. Germany, France, the UK, don't allow pharma companies to gouge their citizens for life saving drugs. Not just first world countries.
It's just your lovely country, home of the free, that considers it's a good idea to let a private entity driven solely by profit, answering to fewer and fewer regulations, develop life saving drugs with taxpayer money and then charge whatever they can get away with (and they can get away with a lot when someone's life is on the line). If a couple people die, who cares. It's an industry that doesn't need to sell a lot of volume. If nine people die because they can only afford paying X, all you need is to find that tenth rich guy that is willing to pay 10X and no profit was lost. Or give Medicare a ton of medicine at a price dictated by them because, only in your country, that one entity isn't allowed to negotiate the price.
But you're not really this evil, right? Or this stupid? It's hard to believe such a dumb caricature of a 20's villain can exist without being a CEO of some corporation. And since I doubt you're a multibillionaire trying to convince some randos on a chess site that it's totally ok to ask for a dying man's last penny you must be a troll.