all 71 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 43 points 3 weeks ago
[–] 26 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

stop trying to make me depressed with 10 year old news.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

    No one’s trying to "make you depressed".

    It’s a meme with an example of the failings of capitalism, not a news post.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    No one’s trying to "make you depressed".

    Working class apathy is absolutely a goal of the capitalists.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

    Apathy yes. Though reducing depression to apathy is problematic. And this isn’t a post by a capitalist but a post criticisng capitalism in an anarchist community. (sorry in advance for being a pedant lol, but I feel it was sort of unfair insinuating OP and the meme had that purpose).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    If anyone needs this information you can still get naloxene for free through some pharmacies and doctor's offices in the USA. They ask you to fill out a questionnaire, but it doesn't cost anything. I acknowledge this is also likely a state by state thing and it isn't offered everywhere. Still worth asking, though!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    In the USA you can arrest every CEO of every for profit company and still be sure that you did not accidentally arrest an innocent person

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 18 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

    In Canada I can walk into any drugstore and get a free naloxone kit. I have no drug addicts in my family and I still have one because my parents kept grabbing one when they would pickup their prescriptions lol

    Wtf is going on down there buddy?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

    people should have a right to life saving drugs. Our country was designed to protect the right to profit, but not the right to live.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -10 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

    you have a right to develop them if you want and they are different enough from the existing ones

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    You can't do human trials for an experimental drug if there's an already-approved drug that would potentially work (which is sensible - you don't want the patient to die if the experimental drug turns out to be worse than what was already available). This is actually one of the main things slowing cancer research, as the only people participating in trials have already gone through multiple rounds of treatment without success, and are so full of metastatised tumours and are so unwell that they're likely to drop dead any day even if given a miracle treatment. It's hard to get a new treatment approved if everyone who had it died afterwards, even if using it as a first-line treatment would probably save millions of lives.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 3 weeks ago

    We're in the bad place

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 3 weeks ago

    Wasn't it Martin Shekreli or another asswipe said that it was a moral duty of pharma makers to charge as much as possible for medication?

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 3 weeks ago

    Not a single Sackler in jail

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    B-Bu.. But Steam is loading a few percentages faster now because of competition from Epic Games Launcher..

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    Steam does not participate in the free market because it's not publicly traded

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

    Of course Steam participates in the (so called) "free market."

    The company itself (that would be Valve) isn't publicly traded, but that doesn't mean anything about the market(s) they participate in.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 3 weeks ago

    There's no such thing as a "free market" in the USA. Like, just look at venture capital ventures: they blow a wad of cash, bloat out competition, ratchet up prices, and profit. The fact that it requires so much capital automatically dissolves most competition, not much of a free market. Also, we'd need to deregulate to have a free market because one thing that disbars competition is the hurdles to even enter the market due to regulations, but regulations are there...like safety regulations, which were written in blood and lawsuits.

  • source
  • It's the Free to Rip You Off Market.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 3 weeks ago (24 children)

    I don't call this Capitalism so much as political demonizing of "the other" - get a few beers in 'em and then ask: "well, don't those junkies deserve to die anyway? I mean, aren't we all better off with them gone?" And they'll say yes, sometimes even when it's their own brother/sister or daughter/son or father/mother who is the addict, but they get strangely quiet when it's themselves.

  • source
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 3 weeks ago (11 children)

    It's also literally how supply and demand work. Demand for the medicine is increasing, thus they raise the price. No ethics needed. That's why it's fucked up. Capitalism doesn't consider the drug addicts less worth - it doesn't consider them at all.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago (8 children)

    Yeah, but these kinds of price swings aren't suppy and demand driven, they're agenda driven.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

    That’s not true. Look at similar spikes in insulin and other lifesaving medicines, for example.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (4 children)

    That’s not true.

    Different, yet similar, agendas.

    What agenda do you think drove the "masks are for sissies" COVID response?

    We have plenty of capacity to make all the insulin we need and more, it's a more profitable business when there's short supply. We have an infinite capacity for greed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

    We have plenty of capacity to make all the insulin we need and more, it's a more profitable business when there's short supply. We have an infinite capacity for greed.

    Exactly, that is free market capitalism.

    What agenda do you think drove the "masks are for sissies" COVID response?

    That one I’m not sure about, but I can’t think of a way it’s money related. However, the prevalence and cost of masks definitely went up during the pandemic, as most people did mask up. Some other supplies also went up in price, like microphones and cameras for computers as everyone started working from home.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    I can’t think of a way it’s money related.

    Just use the tiniest bit of imagination.... how many boomers are out there spending down their retirement savings on healthcare and nursing homes? How many of their (fiscally eager to advance) children aren't too upset that they inherited early, before it was spent down, because the disease that kills old people - unfortunately - took out dear old mumsy and pop who swore they'd never give them a dime until they died?

    most people did mask up

    That wasn't my experience in Floriduh.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    That wasn't my experience in Floriduh.

    It depends heavily on the location. It was basically split right down party lines. Blue areas were like 90% masked, red areas were like 90% unmasked.

    Just use the tiniest bit of imagination....

    I’m trying not to stoop to the level of conspiracy theories. Even so, I don’t think your explanation makes any sense. How would the younger generations, especially those without money, contribute to the right wing propaganda that championed anti-masking ideas? Not to mention that most people care about their relatives for more than just their money.

    The whole anti-masking things makes more sense to me as part of the long-running trend of anti-science propaganda from the right. Maybe that’s driven by oil companies because anti-science attitudes drive climate change denialism. But it also might just be the effects of the social issues that spun off of these things.

    One curious anechdote - my dad was heavily questioning masking during COVID but I don’t remember him questioning masking when our town was full of smoke from wildfires from a few hundred miles north.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago

    How would the younger generations, especially those without money, contribute to the right wing

    The right wing (and left) do things to endear "their base" to them come next election. Our direct neighbors are just one example of many: felt strongly that they should be treating their father - in hospital with COVID - with Ivermectin. They were raging against "the system" that withheld Ivermectin from them for his treatment, and ecstatic when they finally got him transferred to an institution that would respect their wishes. He and his wife left this earth a couple of months later, and now they are owners of the rental properties they used to just manage for their parents, they also spend most of their time traveling. How do you think they'll be voting this go around?

    The number of people aged 40-60 I know who aren't on speaking terms with their parents, but still on-track to inherit their parents' wealth when they die is astoundingly high. They support policies such as eliminating inheritance taxes, passive income taxes, etc. etc. and they will vote for candidates who promise to do that.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 weeks ago (8 children)

    I read your other comments and you seem informed and aware of a lot, I just don't see how you can reflect on such and decide it isn't ultimately driven by capitalism?

    All of the "othering" you've witnessed and are (I think accurately) describing - that human tendency toward incoherent tribalistic behaviors and worldviews - that's baked into us, no disagreement there. But it's the capitalists who leverage it so successfully against us all and have made it the force that it is, here and today.

    Like yeah the phenomena is real pretty much as you're describing, and it results from, is intentionally amplified by (doesn't just incidentally feed into) the way we are choosing to run our society. Capitalism + basic human nature = what we're all watching.

    Not being a jerk. How does capitalism get off the hook as a primary cause here?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago (7 children)

    I don't view capitalism as the primary cause, but more as the excuse. We don't have free unfettered capitalism, there are price controls, labor regulations, every kind of distortion of capitalism: when it serves the agendas at play. When the agenda doesn't care to protect a certain class, like diabetics with not much money, then the agenda lets capitalism run wild.

    So, sure, blame capitalism - it's what happens when you let people decide how much profit they want in combination with IP protections and monopoly markets. That way you don't have to point the finger at a "communist" central planning committee that arbitrarily decided the price for something. In the end, it's still people making decisions. As the song goes: when you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (4 children)

    You seem to just be using your own definitions of capitalism and communism. It's probably not worth bickering much about, but what you're saying doesn't make sense. Not in the way where I think you're wrong and I disagree, in the way that your argument isn't coherent enough to refute.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

    definitions of capitalism and communism. It’s probably not worth bickering much about

    If anything, that's my core point. Whatever definition you try to put on capitalism or communism, you won't find it practiced like that. Our economies are dictated by legislation, executive orders, judicial decisions, corporate actions both inside and outside the law. Labels like capitalism and communism are more window dressing than actual function.

    your argument isn’t coherent enough to refute.

    Which is my position regarding people saying "this is capitalism."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    Labels like capitalism and communism are more window dressing than actual function

    Nah fam. There's no point in labeling sets of ideas if they're rendered useless the moment they diverge from your imagined "pure" form. Being more complicated in practice than just a simple textbook definition doesn't mean they aren't "that" defined thing, it means textbook definitions are always fundamentally weak and flawed. Oversimplifications, models used to describe, not blueprints used to build.

    Capitalism is roughly everywhere, underpinning everything globally because of its roaring success. Communism is roughly nowhere, for the same reasons of capitalism's overwhelming power.

    The distinctions exist and matter.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 child)

    We don't have free unfettered capitalism, there are price controls, labor regulations

    And people literally had to die to get them. You do understand that, right? Those regulations, however meagre they may be, are written in blood.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago

    So, we don't actually have "capitalism" now, except where we decide to let it run rampant.

    This particular example is a protected monopoly. When you let a protected monopoly loose combined with greedy actors, this is what happens. Doesn't matter what umbrella you put over it, the fact is: they've got what other people need and there's no competitor out there who isn't colluding to keep the prices sky high.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    How is this not capitalism? I'd love to hear the rationale there...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 child)

    First tell me, concretely, what is capitalism? Who practices capitalism without distorting the hell out of it all the time? Any capitalists out there without monopoly controls? So, when you decide to and not to prevent monopolies, you're deciding who gets to "act like a capitalist" (aka greedy pig fucker) and who doesn't. It's policy that's deciding to let this happen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago

    ...then Oracle acquired the companies that make fentanyl and naloxone.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago

    Now that's how you socialize costs.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago

    I appreciate the Stirner cameo

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago

    Survival Of The Fittest: It's what America is.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago

    Pharma does this all the time. What's even worse is they will buy the nda/patent and trial it for a completely different application, refile and get a year of exclusivity as the first generic on the market. And the price will skyrocket.

    I spent almost two decades working for Tycho, Covidien, Mallinckrodt, GSK/Haleon and several more. The only thing redeeming was the people at the bottom. The rest is just shit all the way up.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 weeks ago

    Product integration!

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

    And this is why science is getting a bad name. I can kinda understand why there is scepticism on the field, especially vaccine. When explained why vaccine is not pure snakes oil, a retort could be "Oh yeah? Those times when pharmaceuticals did such and such..."

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    The American medical system has been openly screwing people over for decades. It's hard to instill trust in things like vaccines when people are repeatedly treated that way.

    I don't blame the doctors, or the nurses, or the scientists. They are generally doing the best they can in a shitty system. I blame the people who built the system to intentionally be shitty: The administrators, owners, and politicians.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    Ow. Wish I had some pain-killers to forget that.

    Actually, I don't want to normalize drug abuse. If you find it necessary, it's always worth seeking help, and you have more friends than you think you do. Take action.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago

    Was that true in 2017?

    You can but a 2 pack of naloxone for about $50 now over the counter, less with insurance. And many health departments hand them out for free.

  • source
  • [–] 0 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

    Very confusing to see this post receive support on an anarchist community.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 weeks ago (1 child)

    A free market isn't the only way to oppose social hierarchies. Anarchist is just an umbrella term for people who don't believe in one particular thing. Most of them have one proposal or another for deciding who does which tasks.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

    if you are the sole supplier and suddenly people "need" your good you can charge almost whatever you want.

  • source