Milo Yiannopoulos & Martin Shkreli event canceled at UC Davis after violent protests - Polidicks

I'm surprised so many people care about these idiots, let alone want to hear them speak. So what? he's a professional asshole? Isn't this basically what the WBC did years ago but with less god?

[QUOTE=froztshock;51673202]Didn't he have a powerpoint with a picture of a university faculty member and the words 'big fat faggot' over it at some point? That's uh... Pretty offensive.[/QUOTE] Yep it is, and Milo is a race-mixing kike faggot too (Milo's [url=https://youtu.be/TxL_bf7wetE?t=4m56s]own words[/url]). Calling people names is offensive, but it's a double edge sword that would normally devalue a person's platform and opinions like Milo, but seeing how political correctness is so over-bearing and pervasive, people actually are rallying behind Milo instead of being disgusted. And that professor did give extra credit for students to go to his own speech that he scheduled at the same time and therefore entice them to ignore other's opinions. Which is a pretty pathetic (some people might use other slang to describe it) move.

[QUOTE=srobins;51672935]Has anybody ever actually debated him successfully? Surely it wouldn't be impossible to find the unedited footage given that the debates are usually recorded by hundreds of cell phones and independent cameras that don't fall under his editorial control. Sounds a lot like you're just talking nonsense.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://mustangnews.net/cal-poly-republicans-milo-yiannopoulos/"]When he went to Cal Poly College, he and the Republican society who invited him were challenged to take on a debate panel, but they refused and wanted to do Q&A with his fans instead.[/URL] [URL="http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/05/ben-shapiros-messy-breakup-with-breitbart.html"]He challenged Ben Shapiro (who left Breitbart because he protested Milo's provocateurism and Breitbart's devotion to Donald Trump) to a debate, then refused to follow up, first claiming because Breitbart wouldn't let him, then retracting that, then acting like the challenge never happened.[/URL] [URL="https://soundcloud.com/benshapiroshow/ep132"]Statement from Ben about this, stating Milo totally ignored Ben's requests to debate. (Skip to 54:19)[/URL] I don't consider him doing an open Q&A in which any crazy can jump in, or a five minute back and forth on television news a 'debate'. I'll concede my original point was overblown, but I've only seen one "proper" debate was him against Julie Bindel, in a venue hosted by someone who throws out 'cuck' and 'feminism is worse than cancer' jokes. During the debate, Milo basically just cracked jokes, admits he tries to piss people off as much as possible, and talked about how much he likes Bindel because she seems to also hate 'modern feminism' between bouts of interrupting laughter whenever she was stating a point. Then his refutations totally bypassed anything she said. I'd like to see him debate someone like Dr. Kristi Winters (if she'd even accept), but instead he 'challenges' Anita Sarkeesan with the full knowledge she'd never accept (and if she did it'd be like kicking a child for Milo), and Mark Zuckerberg who's too busy wiping his ass with money to care.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51673227]I hate that Martin Shkreli became something of a celebrity by effectively damning people to their deaths for profit.[/QUOTE] I hate that this is like the 40th thread about him and yet people still just keep parroting this same meaningless "he's killing people!!!" bullshit over and over again.

[QUOTE=1239the;51673259][URL="http://mustangnews.net/cal-poly-republicans-milo-yiannopoulos/"]When he went to Cal Poly College, he and the Republican society who invited him were challenged to take on a debate panel, but they refused and wanted to do Q&A with his fans instead.[/URL] [URL="http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/05/ben-shapiros-messy-breakup-with-breitbart.html"]He challenged Ben Shapiro (who left Breitbart because he protested Milo's provocateurism and Breitbart's devotion to Donald Trump) to a debate, then refused to follow up, first claiming because Breitbart wouldn't let him, then retracting that, then acting like the challenge never happened.[/URL] [URL="https://soundcloud.com/benshapiroshow/ep132"]Statement from Ben about this, stating Milo totally ignored Ben's requests to debate. (Skip to 54:19)[/URL] I don't consider him doing an open Q&A in which any crazy can jump in, or a five minute back and forth on television news a 'debate'. I'll concede my original point was overblown, but I've only seen one "proper" debate was him against Julie Bindel, in a venue hosted by someone who throws out 'cuck' and 'feminism is worse than cancer' jokes. During the debate, Milo basically just cracked jokes, admits he tries to piss people off as much as possible, and talked about how much he likes Bindel because she seems to also hate 'modern feminism' between bouts of interrupting laughter whenever she was stating a point. Then his refutations totally bypassed anything she said. I'd like to see him debate someone like Dr. Kristi Winters (if she'd even accept), but instead he 'challenges' Anita Sarkeesan with the full knowledge she'd never accept (and if she did it'd be like kicking a child for Milo), and Mark Zuckerberg who's too busy wiping his ass with money to care.[/QUOTE] What do you think of the videos I posted though? Or his appearances on several BBC panels on different topics? Not to ignore what you said. You bring up good points. I just think there is more to it than just those moments.

[QUOTE=srobins;51672935]Has anybody ever actually debated him successfully? Surely it wouldn't be impossible to find the unedited footage given that the debates are usually recorded by hundreds of cell phones and independent cameras that don't fall under his editorial control. Sounds a lot like you're just talking nonsense.[/QUOTE] Do you want to see someone deconstruct Milo's arguments? Why not look it up yourself? I'm sure there are plenty of people online who have written rebuttals to the pieces he's written or the things he has said. I can do it myself, but I need some examples of arguments Yiannopolous has made for me to rebutt. Can you give me some examples? [editline]15th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=srobins;51673276]I hate that this is like the 40th thread about him and yet people still just keep parroting this same meaningless "he's killing people!!!" bullshit over and over again.[/QUOTE] Raising the price of a drug that people need to live tends to do that. [QUOTE=1239the;51641580]I looked up this claim that he spends the profits he makes on daraprim on research. All I could find was him [I]saying[/I] he 'is going to', and a House Oversight Committee hearing [URL="http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2016/02/04/Why-Martin-Shkreli-Has-Been-Godsend-Drug-Industry"]finding this[/URL]: [QUOTE]The industry claims it must target prices so high to recoup the heavy costs of research and development. But the hearing showed that companies like Turing and Valeant don’t spend much on R&D at all. Congresswoman Brenda Lawrence (D-MI) points out that Valeant’s R&D equaled only 3 percent of sales between 2014 and 2015. Turing had a similarly low percentage, until a public relations consultant told them to raise it. To this day, Turing has not brought a single drug from the conceptual stage all the way to market; its profits come solely from drugs it purchases and makes available at a premium.[/QUOTE] Secondly, how has he made it easy for people who need the drug to get it for free? You can say he's just 'taking advantage of the system and gouging the insurance companies' but it doesn't excuse the fact that he's still exploiting a broken healthcare system and the consequences are that people without insurance (or their insurance won't help them) are being fucked over. There's no option for them to bypass this shit and get it for free, as far as I can see. (Please correct me with a source if I'm wrong, I'd genuinely like to be proven wrong here (and a statement from him with no followup is not a correction, this seems to be something he does a lot: i.e. "lying")). [URL="http://www.fiercepharma.com/pharma/turing-reduces-cost-of-daraprim%C2%AE-pyrimethamine"]In fact, all I can find on these promises to make daraprim easy to get by opening it up to government medicare at steep discounts is just statements from 2015, and nothing saying these statements have actually been put into effect.[/URL] I don't understand how you have this startling insight into his personality like he's playing one giant 'just kidding bro' character and he's actually a super nice guy with a grounding reality but you know he's going to do great things! From all I can see he's just an asshole who lies a lot. [B]Edit[/B] Finally I found two (admittedly kind of tabloidey) posts about how [URL="https://nypost.com/2016/02/02/i-was-a-victim-of-the-pharma-jackass/"]insurance companies are now refusing to cover the cost[/URL] of the drug for patients, and [URL="https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/why-is-martin-shkreli-still-talking"]accessing it through the government is very complicated[/URL]. [QUOTE] Earlier this fall, I got a call from a specialty pharmacy in Michigan.My insurance would no longer cover the cost of Daraprim, a vital medicine in my Lyme disease treatment. They said the drugs would cost me $30,000. “Thirty thousand dollars a year?” I asked, flabbergasted. “No, $30,000 a month,” they responded.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]To his credit, Shkreli wrote to the blog and left his cell number, instructing anyone having troubling finding Daraprim to call him. In the time we spend together, he tells me—many times—that he gives away the pill for free to anyone who can't afford it. Still, patients suffering from toxoplasmosis say that the process to get the drug for free is too complicated for those battling a disorienting illness that disproportionately affects the homeless and indigent. "It's so much harder than an average person would guess to jump through these hoops," says Abigail Schanfield, a 24-year-old from Minneapolis who had brain surgery in October and was diagnosed with congenital toxoplasmosis as an infant. "If you can't afford it, you have to fill out this paperwork to get it for free, which is another barrier to access."[/QUOTE][/QUOTE] Both Milo and Shklreli are awful people, and I'll keep saying that until you can prove me wrong.

[QUOTE=Zyler;51673347]Raising the price of a drug that people need to live tends to do that.[/QUOTE] If your understanding of healthcare comes from children's cartoons then yes, but in the real world, no.

[QUOTE=srobins;51673400]If your understanding of healthcare comes from children's cartoons then yes, but in the real world, no.[/QUOTE] Read the post I quoted in my previous post, it explains how insurance companies are refusing to cover the cost of the drug for patients. Of course you didn't read that post in the last thread either, so how could I expect you to read it this time? The fact that you automatically assume that anyone who disagrees with you has a childlike understanding of the subject matter says a lot about your cognitive biases. I also suspect that your viewpoint is a regurgitation of Shkreli's lie about insurance companies covering the cost and how he's just fighting the big bad corporations/government/whatever, in which case I again suggest you read the post I quoted. He's screwing people out of the drugs they need to live, that's the real world we live in unfortunately.

[QUOTE=Tudd;51673280]What do you think of the videos I posted though? Or his appearances on several BBC panels on different topics? Not to ignore what you said. You bring up good points. I just think there is more to it than just those moments.[/QUOTE] The first video of him against those four feminists on The Big Question? Yeah, the feminist panel were talking over Milo and generally being rude, but at the same time he continually throws out ad hominems in his rebuttals and provoking outrage from them, so I find it hard to blame them for responding over him. The fact the entire thing basically devolved into a back-and-forth attack on each was on both sides, though. In the second video I admit I skimmed it because I'm currently sick and want to go back to sleep, but firstly the entire interview meanders constantly from topic to topic, and Milo's claims seem to go generally unchallenged by Rubin, instead Rubin just seems to let Milo carry on wildly then changes the subject, but in the few cases he does challenge Milo the only response is just to double down on it.

[QUOTE=Zyler;51673411]Read the post I quoted in my previous post, it explains how insurance companies are refusing to cover the cost of the drug for patients. Of course you didn't read that post in the last thread either, so how could I expect you to read it this time? The fact that you automatically assume that anyone who disagrees with you has a childlike understanding of the subject matter says a lot about your cognitive biases. I also suspect that your viewpoint is a regurgitation of Shkreli's lie about insurance companies covering the cost and how he's just fighting the big bad corporations/government/whatever, in which case I again suggest you read the post I quoted. He's screwing people out of the drugs they need to live, that's the real world we live in unfortunately.[/QUOTE] I read it and addressed similar concerns in the last thread. NY Post isn't tabloidy, it's a literal tabloid not worth reading. The VICE article cites a woman who complains that she has to.. fill out paperwork? Am I supposed to be outraged that you need to write your name down to get free medicine?

[QUOTE=1239the;51673428]The first video of him against those four feminists on The Big Question? Yeah, the feminist panel were talking over Milo and generally being rude, but at the same time he continually throws out ad hominems in his rebuttals and provoking outrage from them, so I find it hard to blame them for responding over him. The fact the entire thing basically devolved into a back-and-forth attack on each was on both sides, though. In the second video I admit I skimmed it because I'm currently sick and want to go back to sleep, but firstly the entire interview meanders constantly from topic to topic, and Milo's claims seem to go generally unchallenged by Rubin, instead Rubin just seems to let Milo carry on wildly then changes the subject, but in the few cases he does challenge Milo the only response is just to double down on it.[/QUOTE] Totally fair points on both of those videos. All I am trying to demonstrate is that Milo is not incapable or afraid to debate. Perhaps with Ben Shapiro, but I have my own ideas on why that is (The Breibart relation/avoiding political infighting basically). The Rubin report is mild mostly because they agree so much on alot of contemporary issues they discussed. Just to post a few, but really just google and you can find many more examples. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsNudSARKZ4&t=188s[/media] [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUozYwjLxrE[/media] Now people don't have the time or investment to critique all of this, and I understand that, but Milo can be debated is the point I am trying to make. If he wins those debates is a different point to make.

[QUOTE=srobins;51673465]I read it and addressed similar concerns in the last thread. NY Post isn't tabloidy, it's a literal tabloid not worth reading. The VICE article cites a woman who complains that she has to.. fill out paperwork? Am I supposed to be outraged that you need to write your name down to get free medicine?[/QUOTE] Even ignoring the fact that you consider nymag a tabloid but you consider a reporter from Breitbart and the man actually being accused of price hiking to be totally reliable, there are other official sources showing the detrimental effects of rising the price of Daraprim. A letter from the HIV medicine association highlighting the fact that hospitals cannot afford to stock the life-saving medication: [url]http://www.hivma.org/uploadedFiles/HIVMA/HomePageContent/PyrimethamineLetterFINAL.pdf[/url] You also really don't understand how the economy works if you think the only result from raising the price of a drug is that people have to fill out more paperwork. Insurance companies have to raise premiums in order to offset the increased price of the drug. The above linked letter says that the new prices will effectively make the average cost $336,000 for those who weigh less than 132 pounds, and $634,500 for those who weigh more than that. Ironically, I don't think I'm the one who's idea of healthcare comes from children's cartoons. Maybe instead of listening to a renowned arsehole accused of jacking up the price of life-saving medication and assuming that anyone who disagrees with you has a childlike understanding of the subject matter, you could show some humility for once and realize that horrible people often make up lies to justify their horrible behavior.

[QUOTE=Zyler;51673523]Even ignoring the fact that you consider nymag a tabloid but [B]you consider a reporter from Breitbart[/B] and the man actually being accused of price hiking [B]to be totally reliable[/B], there are other official sources showing the detrimental effects of rising the price of Daraprim. A letter from the HIV medicine association highlighting the fact that hospitals cannot afford to stock the life-saving medication: [url]http://www.hivma.org/uploadedFiles/HIVMA/HomePageContent/PyrimethamineLetterFINAL.pdf[/url] You also really don't understand how the economy works if you think the only result from raising the price of a drug is that people have to fill out more paperwork. Insurance companies have to raise premiums in order to offset the increased price of the drug. The above linked letter says that the new prices will effectively make the average cost $336,000 for those who weigh less than 132 pounds, and $634,500 for those who weigh more than that. Ironically, I don't think I'm the one who's idea of healthcare comes from children's cartoons. Maybe instead of listening to a renowned arsehole accused of jacking up the price of life-saving medication and assuming that anyone who disagrees with you has a childlike understanding of the subject matter, you could show some humility for once and realize that horrible people often make up lies to justify their horrible behavior.[/QUOTE] That's news to me! You're a bit busy arguing with somebody that doesn't exist apparently, I never called Milo reliable but that's beside the point. Read my post in the previous thread, I've already gone over everything you're regurgitating and at this point it's just dead boring having to go over the exact same points over and over again for every overzealous poster looking for someone to be upset with.

[QUOTE=srobins;51673556]That's news to me! You're a bit busy arguing with somebody that doesn't exist apparently, I never called Milo reliable but that's beside the point. Read my post in the previous thread, I've already gone over everything you're regurgitating and at this point it's just dead boring having to go over the exact same points over and over again for every overzealous poster looking for someone to be upset with.[/QUOTE] You haven't addressed the points I've made and at this point you are just being evasive. If you don't want to engage with the people in this thread, why are you still here? You cannot justify raising the price of a life-saving medication. Frankly, your insulting and demeaning attitude combined with your persistence in justifying the actions of a demonstrably cruel and horrible individual says a lot about you as a person. Once again, you did not read my post and you completely ignored the point I made about the fact that insurance companies have to raise premiums in order to offset the increased price of the drug. The above linked letter in my previous post says that the new prices will effectively make the average cost $336,000 for those who weigh less than 132 pounds, and $634,500 for those who weigh more than that. It's funny that you call me zealous when your fanboy-like obsession with defending the honor of such an obviously horrible individual such as Shkreli marks you as somewhat of a zealot yourself.

Just going to post this now since it seems the Martin Shkreli debate might need it. [media]https://youtu.be/HXVQOZDKlRE[/media]

srobins, have you perhaps considered that the reason so many people are upset with you has something to do with the way you act towards others and the awfulness of the people you support and not, as you seem to believe, because you are superior to everyone else's childlike intellect?

[QUOTE=Zyler;51672720]Ultimately it comes down to this: What's the point? Why do the facepunch moderators ban people who go into threads, refuse to engage with anyone and do nothing except post racial slurs and spew bullshit about how [url=https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1501338&p=49518971&viewfull=1#post49518971]a little girl should've dodged a bullet[/url], [url=https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1496613&p=49284276&viewfull=1#post49284276]how it's okay to fuck animals[/url], [url=https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1509510&p=49890436&viewfull=1#post49890436]how it's okay to fuck corpses[/url] or how everyone who disagrees with them is a paid clinton shill? Why don't we respect their opinions and not belittle them? Isn't that some russian-style tyrannical type bullshit? Milo is just an internet shitposter who makes disengenious arguments, lies, insults people and publicly harrasses them for his own enjoyment. Why should he be treated any differently than any other internet shitposter?[B] Moreover, why should anyone be forced to engage with him and his awful behavior on any level?[/B][/QUOTE] They're not, but there is clearly people interested enough to watch his youtube and buy his book, what I'm saying is why are those that are so upset with him; being the way he is, what he's saying and shit. Why attack him, why not show him why he's wrong in an actual civil debate? Instead of throwing dog shit. Nobody is being forced to listen to either Milo or shkreli, but if it annoys you so much you think you need to shut it down, do so by showing him he's wrong or have him prove it without being an actual anecdotal, hyperbolic, DOOSH BEG. Otherwise do as you said and leave them alone, they'll die down eventually but they'd rather do these weird sit in protests in his lectures, have nothing to say for 20 minutes then get upset at something, yell something, that barely is heard cause the audio is set up properly, then storm off. Like I'm sure he'd probably gag at the opportunity to actually prove himself or at least attempt to flaunt his "knowledge" around.

[QUOTE=Zyler;51673594]srobins, have you perhaps considered that the reason so many people are upset with you has something to do with the way you act towards others and the awfulness of the people you support and not, as you seem to believe, because you are superior to everyone else's childlike intellect?[/QUOTE] Hm, not really!

[QUOTE=Zyler;51673594]srobins, have you perhaps considered that the reason so many people are upset with you has something to do with the way you act towards others and the awfulness of the people you support and not, as you seem to believe, because you are superior to everyone else's childlike intellect?[/QUOTE] Wait, you sure that wasn't a description of yourself? In half your posts you can't help but insult the person you're talking to by giving asinine summations that totally misrepresent their argument.

[QUOTE=Zyler;51673594]srobins, have you perhaps considered that the reason so many people are upset with you has something to do with the way you act towards others and the awfulness of the people you support and not, as you seem to believe, because you are superior to everyone else's childlike intellect?[/QUOTE] I actually think he is being quite reasonable in his debate on this topic.

[QUOTE=Lollipoopdeck;51673607]They're not, but there is clearly people interested enough to watch his youtube and buy his book, what I'm saying is why are those that are so upset with him; being the way he is, what he's saying and shit. Why attack him, why not show him why he's wrong in an actual civil debate? Instead of throwing dog shit. Nobody is being forced to listen to either Milo or shkreli, but if it annoys you so much you think you need to shut it down, do so by showing him he's wrong or have him prove it without being an actual anecdotal, hyperbolic, DOOSH BEG. Otherwise do as you said and leave them alone, they'll die down eventually but they'd rather do these weird sit in protests in his lectures, have nothing to say for 20 minutes then get upset at something, yell something, that barely is heard cause the audio is set up properly, then storm off. Like I'm sure he'd probably gag at the opportunity to actually prove himself or at least attempt to flaunt his "knowledge" around.[/QUOTE] Do you want somebody to deconstruct Milo and Shrekli's arguments in order to prove to you that they are full of crap? Or are you arguing that it is a sign of hypocrisy for anyone to dismiss the two individuals as horrible people without debating them in a civil debate? If it's the first thing, I'm more than willing to deconstruct any of their arguments if anyone in this thread can show them to me. Moreover, I'm sure there are plenty of people who are much smarter than me who have analysed and disproven every statement they have ever made and you could find it if you went looking for it. If it's the second thing, why should anybody want to debate Milo or Shkreli? All that's going to happen is that the person arguing with them is going to come up with good or bad sounding arguments and Milo or Shkreli are going to insult, bully, harass and victimize anyone who disagrees with them. You didn't answer, the questions in my previous post. What's the point in addressing their opinions and not the opinions of the facepuncher who wants to fuck animals, or the one who wants to fuck corpses? Why shouldn't any of those people be allowed to express themselves without being dismissed no matter how horrible their behavior is? [editline]15th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=sgman91;51673633]Wait, you sure that wasn't a description of yourself? In half your posts you can't help but insult the person you're talking to by giving asinine summations that totally misrepresent their argument.[/QUOTE] Your not actually posing an argument for me to misrepresent. For me to misrepresent your argument, you'd have to have one first. [editline]15th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Tudd;51673648]I actually think he is being quite reasonable in his debate on this topic.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=srobins;51673400]If your understanding of healthcare comes from children's cartoons then yes, but in the real world, no.[/QUOTE] The implication of this post doesn't seem quite reasonable to me.

[QUOTE=Zyler;51673656]The implication of this post doesn't seem quite reasonable to me.[/QUOTE] Can you find me a single report of somebody dying because of the Daraprim price increase? Surely with all these people dying left and right in the streets, deprived of Daraprim, we'd have an account of somebody [I]actually[/I] being negatively affected, right? Or have they somehow slipped through the cracks despite Turing/Shkreli being under the media's spotlight for over a year?

[QUOTE=srobins;51673697]Can you find me a single report of somebody dying because of the Daraprim price increase? Surely with all these people dying left and right in the streets, deprived of Daraprim, we'd have an account of somebody [I]actually[/I] being negatively affected, right? Or have they somehow slipped through the cracks despite Turing/Shkreli being under the media's spotlight for over a year?[/QUOTE] Once again, if you had read my post with the link to the letter by the HIV medicine association, Hospitals were unable to afford medicine because of the price increase. If you understand anything about healthcare, as you claim to have beyond a childlike understanding of, you would realize that it's a pretty huge public health risk to deprive hospitals of HIV treating medication. Do you think it is a good thing to deprive hospitals of life-saving medication? Do you think it's a good thing to raise health insurance premiums for people who need said life-saving medication? Can you just for a second think about the implications of what I am saying and stop this one upmanship bullshit? The only way that it couldn't negatively affect people is if the HIV medicine association, the Infectious Disease Association of America and just about the entire body of doctors, health insurance specialists and pharmacists who criticized Shkreli for his actions were involved in some sort of elaborate conspiracy to make him look bad.

[QUOTE=Zyler;51673742]Once again, if you had read my post with the link to the letter by the HIV medicine association, Hospitals were unable to afford medicine because of the price increase. If you understand anything about healthcare, as you claim to have beyond a childlike understanding of, you would realize that it's a pretty huge public health risk to deprive hospitals of HIV treating medication. Do you think it is a good thing to deprive hospitals of life-saving medication? Do you think it's a good thing to raise health insurance premiums for people who need said life-saving medication? Can you just for a second think about the implications of what I am saying and stop this one upmanship bullshit?[/QUOTE] So, that's a big [B]no[/B] from you, just to be clear? If you'd done any cursory research into the Daraprim situation you'd realize that the letter from the HIV association was addressed by Turing by issuing discounted/free restockings to affected facilities. But hey, keep talking, it's almost entertaining watching you spew nonsense that is so easily defused over and over again.

[QUOTE=srobins;51673751]So, that's a big [B]no[/B] from you, just to be clear? If you'd done any cursory research into the Daraprim situation you'd realize that the letter from the HIV association was addressed by Turing by issuing discounted/free restockings to affected facilities. But hey, keep talking, it's almost entertaining watching you spew nonsense that is so easily defused over and over again.[/QUOTE] So your telling me that the company that raised the price of Daraprim had to offer free medicine to the people they screwed over AFTER massive public outcry about the horrible things they were doing? They had to literally be publicly shamed into undoing the thing that they knew was going to cause millions of people to lose access to medication they needed to live. The only reason people didn't die is that the HIV medicine association forced them to undo the thing they were doing, thereby proving that they knew the thing they were doing was detrimental to public health in the first place. You just defeated your own argument.

[QUOTE=Zyler;51673767]So your telling me that the company that raised the price of Daraprim had to offer free medicine to the people they screwed over AFTER massive public outcry about the horrible things they were doing? They had to literally be publicly shamed into undoing the thing that they knew was going to cause millions of people to lose access to medication they needed to live. The only reason people didn't die is that the HIV medicine association forced them to undo what they were doing. You just defeated your own argument.[/QUOTE] I'm sorry, you want me to be outraged that a company went out of their way to ensure that patients and practitioners had access to life saving medication after a price hike that was shouldered almost entirely by multi-billion dollar health insurance companies? Is that what we're upset about now? Because only an hour or two ago, we were upset about Martin Shkreli killing people. Do you even know what you're upset about at this point?

[QUOTE=srobins;51673783]I'm sorry, you want me to be outraged that a company went out of their way to ensure that patients and practitioners had access to life saving medication after a price hike that was shouldered almost entirely by multi-billion dollar health insurance companies? Is that what we're upset about now? Because only an hour or two ago, we were upset about Martin Shkreli killing people. Do you even know what you're upset about at this point?[/QUOTE] Yes, I'm upset because his actions almost did kill people, and it's only because the rest of us stopped him that it didn't. I guess if a murderer tries to kill someone and I stop them that means the murderer had no intention of killing someone in the first place. Seriously, take a step back and analyze what you are saying, it's fucking insane.

[QUOTE=Zyler;51673794]Yes, I'm upset because his actions almost did kill people, and it's only because the rest of us stopped him that it didn't. I guess if a murderer tries to kill someone and I stop them that means the murderer had no intention of killing someone in the first place. Seriously, take a step back and analyze what you are saying, it's fucking insane.[/QUOTE] Wait, is he killing people or almost killing people? You've made both claims on this page already.

[QUOTE=sgman91;51673805]Wait, is he killing people or almost killing people? You've made both claims on this page already.[/QUOTE] Read the post again, I don't think it's that confusing. [QUOTE=Zyler;51673794] I guess if a murderer tries to kill someone and I stop them that means the murderer had no intention of killing someone in the first place.[/QUOTE] If Shkreli had no intention of making people pay more for the drug, why would he raise the price in the first place?

[QUOTE=Zyler;51673794]Yes, I'm upset because his actions almost did kill people, and it's only because the rest of us stopped him that it didn't. I guess if a murderer tries to kill someone and I stop them that means the murderer had no intention of killing someone in the first place. Seriously, take a step back and analyze what you are saying, it's fucking insane.[/QUOTE] Hm, you know, I typically hate when people use this phrase in internet arguments but.. Isn't this a little something called "shifting goalposts"? It doesn't exactly inspire confidence in your argument when you have to constantly concede and divert attention to lesser and lesser offenses just so you have a reason to keep talking.. Have you considered maybe [I]you[/I] are the one that's wrong? It might be time for break.