[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;53190785]it's a shit analogy maybe make a comparison with people other than the most evil ones you can think of at the moment[/QUOTE]
I think you totally missed the point of the analogy. It wasn't intended to imply Skreli is as bad as those people. It was giving an example that the majority of people would be able to recognize of why good deeds alone doesn't make you a good person. I really dunno how so many people missed that when it's so obvious.
[editline]9th March 2018[/editline]
[QUOTE=27X;53190823]Says the guy who files school shootings as going under the "ya know shit happens" category of daily events. It seems pretty plain whom needs quite a large chunk of therapy.
As for Shkreli I haven't seen or heard anything that would fall under "secret asshole altruist" at all, unless he's somehow managed to hide for the last five years.[/QUOTE]
Replying to joost is a waste of time. He's contrarian for the sake of it and can never actually defend his points worth a damn. (If he even bothers trying to.)
I sincerely believe Martin Shkreli was sent here by some cosmic force to test my beliefs in prison abolition.
I think maybe we should just take away all his money and give him a good ol swirlie.
[QUOTE=27X;53190823]Says the guy who files school shootings as going under the "ya know shit happens" category of daily events. It seems pretty plain whom needs quite a large chunk of therapy.
As for Shkreli I haven't seen or heard anything that would fall under "secret asshole altruist" at all, unless he's somehow managed to hide for the last five years.[/QUOTE]
What? Where does this even come from? Not to mention I never said anything close to that?
[editline]10th March 2018[/editline]
[QUOTE=Alice3173;53190827]I think you totally missed the point of the analogy. It wasn't intended to imply Skreli is as bad as those people. It was giving an example that the majority of people would be able to recognize of why good deeds alone doesn't make you a good person. I really dunno how so many people missed that when it's so obvious.
[editline]9th March 2018[/editline]
Replying to joost is a waste of time. He's contrarian for the sake of it and can never actually defend his points worth a damn. (If he even bothers trying to.)[/QUOTE]
Mate I've been wanting to reply to all these posts but it's useless. Look at Sir Whoopsalot's post at the top:
"Being happy a criminal is being imprisoned = you need a psychologist.
What riveting, rock-solid arguments here! "
And just a few posts down from that is someone admitting they'd rather shoot Shkreli twice in the face than a drug lord.
It's a massive waste of time trying to respond to everyone if they're never going to want to change their opinion.
But please, don't respond to this and turn the whole topic on it's side. Just continue about the topic on hand.
So what he was actually caught on wasn't related to the price hike or anything. IIRC he didn't specify to the investors what he was spending their money on. The investors got rich off the deal, but it was still fraud. That's his crime. Fraud. Yet the reactions in this thread are more hostile than your average Weinstein thread. That's what I just can't get my head around. I can understand hating Shkreli, he's an arrogant douchebag. But he's definitely not one of the worst people out there.
He's a fraud and a prick, I don't care if there are or have been worse people out there than him, this isn't a competition of how shit of a person someone can be, he's shady and shouldn't be trusted and that's that, what a dumb argument.
[QUOTE=Uber22;53190370]Care to give a thoughtful analysis of why we shouldn't criticize or hate your idol?
Or you just doing a drive-by shitpost to piss everyone off?[/QUOTE]
Why are you assuming that Skreli is his idol just because he doesn't hate him like you do? It makes you look dumb. Like you're seriously incapable of analyzing viewpoints other than your own.
Good riddance fucker!
[QUOTE=Alice3173;53190827]I think you totally missed the point of the analogy. It wasn't intended to imply Skreli is as bad as those people. It was giving an example that the majority of people would be able to recognize of why good deeds alone doesn't make you a good person. I really dunno how so many people missed that when it's so obvious.
[editline]9th March 2018[/editline]
Replying to joost is a waste of time. He's contrarian for the sake of it and can never actually defend his points worth a damn. (If he even bothers trying to.)[/QUOTE]
It's a shit analogy because there's plenty of examples other than those people you could use. It implies he's like them as part of the fucking point of using those names. That's the implication, it's not directly written, but you don't just get to back out of implying such when it becomes apparent that it's stupid to do so.
Come on dude, this is some elementary linguistics. You cannot look me in the eye and tell me making that comparison and calling him evil wasn't part of the point of that post.
[QUOTE=joost1120;53190374]What? A man being arrogant is a lot less disgusting to me than several guys being glad he's imprisoned, up to the point of saying "Good, fuck him". There's nothing wrong with wanting him imprisoned for breaking a law, but the way some people voiced their opinion make me think they need a psychologist.[/QUOTE]
Please don't be one of those people who thinks everyone who doesn't follow their particular line of thought is mentally ill, it's really fucking obnoxious.
Just because people don't agree with you or follow your hyper specific form of morality doesn't mean they have mental problems.
[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;53190927]It's a shit analogy because there's plenty of examples other than those people you could use. It implies he's like them as part of the fucking point of using those names. That's the implication, it's not directly written, but you don't just get to back out of implying such when it becomes apparent that it's stupid to do so.
Come on dude, this is some elementary linguistics. You cannot look me in the eye and tell me making that comparison and calling him evil wasn't part of the point of that post.[/QUOTE]
The entire point of the post was to give an easily understandable example of why doing good deeds does not inherently make you a good person. Anything more is putting words into their mouth.
[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;53190927]It's a shit analogy because there's plenty of examples other than those people you could use. It implies he's like them as part of the fucking point of using those names. That's the implication, it's not directly written, but you don't just get to back out of implying such when it becomes apparent that it's stupid to do so.
Come on dude, this is some elementary linguistics. You cannot look me in the eye and tell me making that comparison and calling him evil wasn't part of the point of that post.[/QUOTE]
The guys I used were beside the point. The only real reason I used them was that they were the first people I could think of who were shitty human beings but sometimes did good deeds. It should go without saying that Shkreli isn't as bad as those people.
[QUOTE=joost1120;53190346]The people who hate him disgust me more than his arrogance.[/QUOTE]
Classic joost never change haha what a guy
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;53190191]I never got that defence of him. "He's just fucking over insurance companies." Yeah, and causing them to raise everyone else's premiums in the process. No matter how you cut it he was being a dick, both in his personality and in his actions.[/QUOTE]
Hiking up the price of drugs wasn't a bad move on his part - he got [I]zero[/I] repercussions for this, even after the court tried to charge him for it. He's known for actually putting a huge portion of company revenue into research/development. He earned the title of "pharma bro" for a reason. He's smarter in science than he is in business, and does his own fair share of actually developing drugs for rare disease markets that he knows will probably not yield profits once manufactured. A lot of companies are don't give a flying fuck about improving medicine.
I know it's not a great argument to say "other companies are doing it worse, so he's in the clear", but seriously... [URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3bpXHMP4ww&t=48m30s"]his prices hikes don't do a single [I]dent[/I] to insurance premiums.[/URL] If you're going to pin somebody for greed and fucking up the pharmaceutical industry, Shkreli's not the guy.
[editline]9th March 2018[/editline]
Not saying it excuses his behavior. I think he really dug his own hole with the way he responded to the media.
[QUOTE]“There are times when I want to hug him,” Mr. Shkreli’s lawyer, Benjamin Brafman, told the judge on Friday, arguing for a short sentence. “There are times I want to punch him in the face because he’s made my job more difficult by some of the things he’s said.”[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;53190927]It's a shit analogy because there's plenty of examples other than those people you could use. It implies he's like them as part of the fucking point of using those names. That's the implication, it's not directly written, but you don't just get to back out of implying such when it becomes apparent that it's stupid to do so.
Come on dude, this is some elementary linguistics. You cannot look me in the eye and tell me making that comparison and calling him evil wasn't part of the point of that post.[/QUOTE]
Buddy, I'll not only look you in the eye, but look so close that our eyeballs will be frenching.
[QUOTE=Swiket;53190239]If I had a gun with two bullets, and I was in a room with Escobar, bin Laden, and Shkreli, I would shoot Shkreli twice.[/QUOTE]
Well the first two are dead so that makes this a pretty easy choice.
The dude is scummy, though he is a scapegoat for the scummiest. Not saying he doesn't deserve those charges, but a lot of people deserve even more.
[QUOTE=Scot;53190163]lmao, comparing shkreli to escobar and bin laden
He did what almost every other pharmaceutical company has done before him. It's fairly standard practice and it could be argued that Shkreli has actually put an end to it, even if that wasn't his intention.
Not to say he isn't a twat (he basically lied and stole his way to the top) but to put him up there with bin laden is just fucking retarded. If you're gonna be mad at something be mad at the system that allows these price hikes to happen.[/QUOTE]
You're right, why are we acting like Shkreli's the bad guy here? Thanks to him, now we KNOW the super-wealthy drug companies are doing fraudulent things! Now we can finally get some LAWS in place to put an end to this injustice!
[QUOTE=joost1120;53190842]Mate I've been wanting to reply to all these posts but it's useless. Look at Sir Whoopsalot's post at the top:
"Being happy a criminal is being imprisoned = you need a psychologist.
What riveting, rock-solid arguments here! "
And just a few posts down from that is someone admitting they'd rather shoot Shkreli twice in the face than a drug lord.
It's a massive waste of time trying to respond to everyone if they're never going to want to change their opinion.
But please, don't respond to this and turn the whole topic on it's side. Just continue about the topic on hand. [/QUOTE]
You derail the thread with shitposting and now not only are you calling out other people for supposedly doing the same but you're also calling for everyone else to get back on topic?
I wonder how long it'll take for you to get that perma because you really need to learn how things work.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Backseat moderation - Report, don't reply" - Mezzokoko))[/highlight]
good riddance lol i just wished he could have bailed out bobby
[QUOTE=1/4 Life;53190170]He's still looking at that though. Out in 2 years with good behavior.[/QUOTE]
Martin Shkreli and good behaviour. Hah! Good joke.
I get the points that people bring up with Shkreli on how he's smart in certain subjects and such. But that still doesn't change the fact that he's a cunt. I can probably produce a "Book of the Dead" sized book of people throughout human history that were smart and probably gave great advice and such, but were/probably the most insufferable douchebags/cunts/asshats to even be around.
[QUOTE=Swiket;53190239]If I had a gun with two bullets, and I was in a room with Escobar, bin Laden, and Shkreli, I would shoot Shkreli twice.[/QUOTE]
I would shoot once and miss, and then shoot again and apparently miss and when one of them says I missed the chandelier above their head crashes down on all of them.
He might have the attitude of the biggest prick on the planet, but I do have to say that his efforts into raising the price, while not affecting the clients cost of the drug was a impressive feat.
I myself take advantage of subsidies like this, thanks Australia.
His words, it really is" a shitty 70 year old drug", and being able fund improving it with real modern medicine procedures would definitely help benefit the tiny percentage of people that require it in the long run.
I just really think it's his attitude really brought in the shitstorm. Really smart guy for someone who also acts like a child.
[QUOTE=Scot;53190163]lmao, comparing shkreli to escobar and bin laden
He did what almost every other pharmaceutical company has done before him. [b]It's fairly standard practice and it could be argued that Shkreli has actually put an end to it, even if that wasn't his intention.[/b]
Not to say he isn't a twat (he basically lied and stole his way to the top) but to put him up there with bin laden is just fucking retarded. If you're gonna be mad at something be mad at the system that allows these price hikes to happen.[/QUOTE]
What are you smoking? :v:
[QUOTE=Dave_Parker;53192067]While I agree that a lot of CEO types are often overpaid, it's rather naive to go after the pharma industry for trying to make a profit.
[B]Making medicine is expensive as hell, and governments aren't in a position to do it. That means developing new medicine falls to the free market, which means they need to charge a premium in order to make a profit so they can develop even more medicine.[/B][/QUOTE]
My issue with this is that it's incredibly hard to tell where the funding for a certain medication came from. There are probably a lot of cases where a company has spent billions on independent research and development and come up with some drug. The issue is a lot of the time, the picture is less clear - how much did other (government funded or otherwise) research contribute to this? How much did the pharmaceutical company spend?
The issue is that the production of the actual drug itself is usually insignificant to its cost, and the trail of research and development (the cost of which is the justification of the price) can be hard to follow - drugs are bounced between companies, smaller companies are bought by larger ones when they hit a gold mine etc. Does anyone really know how much, say, Sofosbuvir cost to develop? With cars the cost of production and demand for the car are very proportional - leather is more expensive than, say, a synthetic fabric, but accordingly it's seen as more attractive to most buyers. With drugs, the cost of developing it can be completely unhinged from its usefulness, but demand is inelastic - so price can in effect be completely unrelated to how expensive the drug was to develop. I also have to question [I]how[/I] risky it really is to develop drugs. Sure, a drug can fail during phase III trials and cost the company a whole bunch of money, but non-drug products can fail horrendously in the market as well.
I don't think drug research for profit is inherently a bad thing - I think the market has the potential to develop drugs more diverse and more efficiently than the state. But there is a serious lack of transparency in the pricing of drugs, and you end up with a "take-it-or-leave-it" pricing, where currently all you can really do is set a price cut-off per QALY, which might have no relation at all to the effort that went into developing the drug. Either way, medicinal costs are skyrocketing - and I think that calls for a lot more transparency to justify what the public is spending its money on. In my opinion, drug companies should be forced to lay out what they spent to research and develop a specific drug. It's not like these companies haven't already made an internal analysis of what price they think they can demand that will lead to profitability. I think it's only ethical considering how tough prioritization is when it comes to medicine - when you decide a drug is too expensive, you're denying someone perhaps years of their lives, and that of course makes it much easier for drug companies to demand high prices.
Probably worth mentioning that the specific medicine that Shkreli bought the US rights for essentially was not produced by anyone else in the US, despite the open ability at the time to create a generic equivalent. It was only after a lot of drama cropped up about it that people started looking into alternative means of production for this niche drug, whereas other places in the world have several different manufacturers - I think India has like a dozen all on its own.
Not saying Shkreli had some kind of plan to make the industry better or something but I think it's pretty telling of how thoroughly shitty that whole industry is when the only way to make people give a shit is to give them opportunity for a publicity stunt while some other dude gets shit on by the media.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;53193738]Probably worth mentioning that the specific medicine that Shkreli bought the US rights for essentially was not produced by anyone else in the US, despite the open ability at the time to create a generic equivalent. It was only after a lot of drama cropped up about it that people started looking into alternative means of production for this niche drug, whereas other places in the world have several different manufacturers - I think India has like a dozen all on its own.
Not saying Shkreli had some kind of plan to make the industry better or something but I think it's pretty telling of how thoroughly shitty that whole industry is when the only way to make people give a shit is to give them opportunity for a publicity stunt while some other dude gets shit on by the media.[/QUOTE]
Marketing a generic in the US still requires FDA approval, something that was made unnecessarily difficult for pyrimethamine thanks to it being sold under closed distribution: competitors wishing to manufacture a generic alternative were not able to obtain the samples needed for equivalence studies. See [url="http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2015/09/21/martin-shkreli-has-one-idea-and-its-a-bad-one"]this post[/url] regarding pyrimethamine itself, and [url="http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2014/09/11/the_most_unconscionable_drug_price_hike_i_have_yet_seen"]this[/url] and [url="http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2013/10/21/catalyst_pharmaceuticals_and_their_business_plan"]this[/url] post for previous examples of this strategy being used.
[QUOTE=Uber22;53191521]I get the points that people bring up with Shkreli on how he's smart in certain subjects and such. But that still doesn't change the fact that he's a cunt. I can probably produce a "Book of the Dead" sized book of people throughout human history that were smart and probably gave great advice and such, but were/probably the most insufferable douchebags/cunts/asshats to even be around.[/QUOTE]
Can someone tell me what exactly is he "smart" in?
I have watched some of his videos and most of his arguments against price hike critics are extremely childish and so hilariously wrong. I don't think wasting time going through course 101 of every imaginable human science branch makes one smart either.
[editline]12th March 2018[/editline]
He only seems smart because his fanbase is dumb as all hell.
[QUOTE=Glassboard;53196887]Can someone tell me what exactly is he "smart" in?
I have watched some of his videos and most of his arguments against price hike critics are extremely childish and so hilariously wrong. I don't think wasting time going through course 101 of every imaginable human science branch makes one smart either.
[editline]12th March 2018[/editline]
He only seems smart because his fanbase is dumb as all hell.[/QUOTE]
To be fair he managed to go from being a broke dude in a broke family of immigrants to making millions through finance.
It takes some level of competency to get there, even if he wholly and blatantly misused it by lying left and right to the point where it inevitably got criminal. But there's definitely enough smart in Shkreli to have an understanding of the industry and how to turn a profit in it.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;53197037]To be fair he managed to go from being a broke dude in a broke family of immigrants to making millions through finance.
It takes some level of competency to get there, even if he wholly and blatantly misused it by lying left and right to the point where it inevitably got criminal. But there's definitely enough smart in Shkreli to have an understanding of the industry and how to turn a profit in it.[/QUOTE]
And luck, lots of luck
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;53197043]And luck, lots of luck[/QUOTE]
Luck can carry you a little but it can't get you from poor to a net worth of nearly 30 million dollars.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
