Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, September 12, 2018

A pharmaceutical company executive defended his company's recent 400% drug price increase, telling the Financial Times that his company had a "moral requirement to sell the product at the highest price." The head of the US Food and Drug Administration blasted the executive in a response on Twitter.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

"I think it is a moral requirement to make money when you can," Mulye told the Financial Times, "to sell the product for the highest price."
The Financial Times said Mulye compared his decision to increase the price to that of an art dealer who sells "a painting for half a billion dollars" and said he was in "this business to make money."

A perfect snapshot of the rot that is at the core of our society's demise.

#1 | Posted by jpw at 2018-09-11 11:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 16

May this guy die of severe ass cancer.

#2 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-09-12 01:13 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 8

-------- like this are the reason why we can't have nice things.

#3 | Posted by 726 at 2018-09-12 07:22 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Health care should not be a commodity.

#4 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-09-12 08:41 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1


Therein lies a big problem with a "healthcare for profit" system.

#5 | Posted by LampLighter at 2018-09-12 12:42 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Throw the greedy SOB in jail!!!!!!!!!!!! A decent profit is expected but that is crazy.

#6 | Posted by Sniper at 2018-09-12 12:43 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

I say the govt has a moral obligation to strip the patent from the drug and make it a generic.

#7 | Posted by byrdman at 2018-09-12 12:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Throw the greedy SOB in jail!!!!!!!!!!!! A decent profit is expected but that is crazy.

#6 | POSTED BY SNIPER

What are you??? A communist? Shouldn't the free market sort this out?

You must be a regulation-happy, large government, entitled snowflake. They created these medicines. Don't they have a right to profit off of them at the expense of people's lives? You should just be thankful to the rich people for allowing you to have any money or healthcare at all.

#8 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2018-09-12 12:51 PM | Reply | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 1

And I thought Trump promised to fix this. Republicans... what is taking so long? When are you going to start being actually competent at governing and follow through with your promises?

#9 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2018-09-12 12:55 PM | Reply

"The head of the US Food and Drug Administration blasted the executive in a response on Twitter."

Dannnnnnng!

You gotta know you screwed up when Trump's FDA head thinks you're a greedy SOB.

#10 | Posted by Tor at 2018-09-12 01:07 PM | Reply

Throw the greedy SOB in jail!!!!!!!!!!!! A decent profit is expected but that is crazy.

#6 | Posted by Sniper

Socialist!!!

#11 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-09-12 01:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Throw the greedy SOB in jail!!!!!!!!!!!! A decent profit is expected but that is crazy.

#6 | POSTED BY SNIPER

I certainly hope that when you're bleeding out at an accident scene sometime, you take your time to make the best free market decision you can about which ambulance service to use, or which hospital they should take you too.

#12 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2018-09-12 01:15 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Stories like this are why capitalism should have no place in healthcare. Corporations have no morals and under a capitalist system they exist to deliver profit, not to save the most lives and precent the most illnesses.

Capitalism is diametrically opposed to what should be the fundamental goals of a healthcare system.

#13 | Posted by JOE at 2018-09-12 01:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Imo, we are beyond the drain en route to revolt.

Silicon Dragon New York 2014: Tech Chat - Nirmal Mulye
788 views

He states that his manufacturing is done in the US (yay!) and research is in India (subsidized?!). And he's managing FIVE of these outfits as individual companies, screwing everyone mightily. He really knows how to game the system - well, he is a system.

This is precisely what Republicans dream of becoming.

He used 15 US credit cards taken out at once to begin his international exploitation - that's interesting how a foreign national can access so much money, but it's hard for people to get a loan for schooling or housing. I wish I was born in a village 200 miles outside Bombay.

Anyhow, listening to him it is easy to understand that he exploits everything, so there are limits to any reasonable comparison with a human.

#14 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2018-09-12 01:25 PM | Reply

Pharma chief defends 400% drug price rise as a ‘moral requirement' financialtimes
..

Last month, Nostrum Laboratories, a small Missouri-based drugmaker, more than quadrupled the price of a bottle of nitrofurantoin from $474.75 to $2,392, according to Elsevier's Gold Standard drug database.

Nitrofurantoin is an antibiotic used to treat bladder infections that was first marketed in 1953, which appears on the World Health Organization's list of essential medicines. It comes in a tablet form as well as a liquid version that Nostrum makes.

In an interview, Nirmal Mulye, Nostrum chief executive, said he had priced the product according to market dynamics, adding: "I think it is a moral requirement to make money when you can . . . to sell the product for the highest price."

Mr Mulye said Nostrum was responding to a price rise from Casper Pharma, which makes a branded version of the product known as Furadantin. Casper increased the price of its product by 182 per cent between the end of 2015 and March 2018, taking a bottle to $2,800, according to the Elsevier database.

Casper did not respond to a request for comment.

"The point here is the only other choice is the brand at the higher price. It is still a saving regardless of whether it is a big one or not," said Mr Mulye.

Mr Mulye compared his decision to increase the price to an art dealer that sells "a painting for half a billion* dollars" and said he was in "this business to make money".

He also defended the actions of Martin Shkreli, who became infamous in 2015 for his decision to raise the price of an Aids and cancer drug from $13.50 to $750 per tablet. Shkreli was jailed earlier this year on unrelated fraud charges.

"I agree with Martin Shkreli that when he raised the price of his drug he was within his rights because he had to reward his shareholders," said Mr Mulye.

Mr Mulye pointed out that Shkreli was able to increase the price of Daraprim so dramatically because his company was the only one making it.

"If he's the only one selling it then he can make as much money as he can," said Mr Mulye. "This is a capitalist economy and if you can't make money you can't stay in business."

He added: "We have to make money when we can. The price of iPhones goes up, the price of cars goes up, hotel rooms are very expensive."

-continues-

#15 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2018-09-12 01:35 PM | Reply

Government enforced restrictions to competition allow and encourage this behavior. If an organization could get a competitive or generic drug approved for less than a billion dollars...

#16 | Posted by visitor_ at 2018-09-12 01:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Alternatively, let's all get to together and buy the company and give the drugs away.

#17 | Posted by visitor_ at 2018-09-12 01:53 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Government enforced restrictions to competition allow and encourage this behavior. If an organization could get a competitive or generic drug approved for less than a billion dollars...

#16 | Posted by visitor_

Oh yeah if it weren't for that evil government all the capitalists would be eagerly providing affordable healthcare.

That's why healthcare is so much more affordable in canada and germany right? Because they got government out of it entirely. Wait is that what they did?

#18 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-09-12 02:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Alright, who the Frak hacked Snipers account???

#19 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-09-12 02:05 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Alternatively, let's all get to together and buy the company and give the drugs away.

#17 | Posted by visitor_

Alternatively we could do like all the other countries and allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices.

Or

Alternatively we could buy our drugs from Canada, etc.

(I grow mine in the green house)

#20 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-09-12 02:11 PM | Reply

"The head of the US Food and Drug Administration blasted the executive in a response on Twitter."

And.....they won't do a thing about it.

I seem to recall dotard promising to get tough on drug companies to lower the cost of prescriptions.

thehill.com

Yeah, more -------- from Donny Dealmaker.

#21 | Posted by 726 at 2018-09-12 02:13 PM | Reply

Our government is already heavily involved in healthcare. We have regulatory capture, where the regulated industry controls the regulators.

#22 | Posted by visitor_ at 2018-09-12 02:14 PM | Reply

There are only two issues in politics and Governance and here we are witness to another CEO claiming money (HIS MONEY) is the ONLY MORALITY. AT ITS HEART CAPITALISM IS IMMORAL. It needs regulation in order for society to prosper.

#23 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-09-12 02:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Alternatively we could buy our drugs from Canada, etc." YES THIS!

BUT YOUR LOVELY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DOES LIKE IT!

#24 | Posted by visitor_ at 2018-09-12 02:15 PM | Reply

Alright, who the Frak hacked Snipers account??? Wasn't hard his password was "password1", same as yours.

#25 | Posted by visitor_ at 2018-09-12 02:16 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#23

Capitalism is AMORAL, not immoral. The introduction of any moral concept into capitalism comes from the governments (people or their elected representatives who are responsible for the laws, rules and regulations that dictate trade and employment). Capitalism is about making money, nothing more, nothing less. There is no morality attached to the defined concept.

#26 | Posted by tonyroma at 2018-09-12 02:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#26

Nicely stated, Tony.

#27 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-09-12 02:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Our government is already heavily involved in healthcare. We have regulatory capture, where the regulated industry controls the regulators.

#22 | Posted by visitor_

The solution to that is simple. Fix campaign funding. The root of all our evils. That's how industries bribe the government to serve them instead of the voters. Bernie welcomes your support.

#28 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-09-12 02:40 PM | Reply

"Alright, who the Frak hacked Snipers account???"

Yeah what's going on here?

For a second he sounded like he wasn't the dumbest guy on the internet.

#29 | Posted by Tor at 2018-09-12 02:47 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I get your point. But, if a human made this decision it is immoral, as opposed to the concept of capitalism, which can be viewed in a philosophical amoral perspective as long as it remains in a textbook and has no real world consequences. Immoral capitalism is the only kind we live under because we are not yet subjected to rule by cyborgs. Even if we were, they would probably be designed and built by humans, always the ultimate responsible party, who, while in power, seek to claim responsibility for all things good and deny responsibility for all things bad. That's our Trump in a nutshell, elected not by the people, but agents of capitalism.

#30 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-09-12 03:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#30

You're preaching to the choir. Capitalism is amoral because it can't be anything but. On the flip side, the introduction of humanity into the equation leaves capitalism open to all sorts of moral possibilities.

My point was to the definition, not in how it can and is used by human beings towards their desired ends.

#31 | Posted by tonyroma at 2018-09-12 03:08 PM | Reply

I certainly hope that when you're bleeding out at an accident scene sometime, you take your time to make the best free market decision you can about which ambulance service to use, or which hospital they should take you too.

#12 | Posted by Whatsleft

I guess I should go with the one that charges the most. Should I call around before I let them take me?

#32 | Posted by Sniper at 2018-09-12 03:25 PM | Reply

Stories like this are why capitalism should have no place in healthcare. Corporations have no morals and under a capitalist system they exist to deliver profit, not to save the most lives and precent the most illnesses.

Capitalism is diametrically opposed to what should be the fundamental goals of a healthcare system.

#13 | Posted by JOE

Not quite so fast joe............. They have a corner in the market. Did you ever think why?

#33 | Posted by Sniper at 2018-09-12 03:26 PM | Reply

I guess I should go with the one that charges the most. Should I call around before I let them take me?

#32 | Posted by Sniper

That's the point einstein. In life threatening situations, the free market doesn't work.

#34 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-09-12 03:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Alright, who the Frak hacked Snipers account???

#19 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Got some of you libs wound up. It is a good day.

#35 | Posted by Sniper at 2018-09-12 03:28 PM | Reply

Our government is already heavily involved in healthcare. We have regulatory capture, where the regulated industry controls the regulators.

#22 | Posted by visitor_

And that is most of the problem.

#36 | Posted by Sniper at 2018-09-12 03:29 PM | Reply

#26 | Posted by tonyroma

We are less than 1/2 capitalistic. The gov controls more and more every day.

#37 | Posted by Sniper at 2018-09-12 03:31 PM | Reply

"Got some of you libs wound up. It is a good day."

You enjoy us agreeing with you.

#38 | Posted by Tor at 2018-09-12 03:33 PM | Reply

Alright, who the Frak hacked Snipers account???
#19 | Posted by lfthndthrds
Got some of you libs wound up. It is a good day.
#35 | POSTED BY SNIPER AT 2018-09-12 03:28 PM

It's great to know that even you can have limitations.:]

But seriously, if pretty much every thinking being believes this is scamtastic, what has prevented any part of the system from regulating down the price? Nothing, because it was never intended to:

"I agree with Martin Shkreli that when he raised the price of his drug he was within his rights because he had to reward his shareholders," said Mr Mulye.

His shareholders should be "rewarded" with PU239 fused for airburst.

#39 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2018-09-12 03:41 PM | Reply

Our government is already heavily involved in healthcare. We have regulatory capture, where the regulated industry controls the regulators.

#22 | Posted by visitor_

And that is most of the problem.

#36 | Posted by Sniper

Always good to see trump supporters turn into sanders supporters.

If yall think regulatory capture is bad, you're voting for the wrong party.

#40 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2018-09-12 04:03 PM | Reply

Wasn't hard his password was "password1", same as yours.

#25 | Posted by visitor_ at 2018-09-12 02:16 PMFlag: (Choose)FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusive | Funny: 1

Bull ----, you know he cant spell "password".

#41 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-09-12 04:04 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

Government enforced restrictions to competition allow and encourage this behavior.

#16 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

Exactly. We need to remove government from businesses to let them run efficiently. Get back to real capitalism. Especially this bizarre, heavy-handed government interference called "limited liability". People should be accountable for their actions, including their decision to profit from (invest or be employed by) a business that acts improperly. So, for example, if a company creates a drug that ends up causing traumatic side effects in the future, all past and future owners, executives, stockholders, and employees should be open to lawsuits for negligence.

Right?

That way the risk would be shared equally. The consumer would not be protected from shoddy drugs by the government, but they would have recourse against anyone who profited from the shoddy drugs (as opposed to now where the government limits liability to the corporate entity, but also regulates that entity to ensure it produces a safe product).

Oh... never mind. I forgot. You're a Republican. So of course you only want to push more risk onto the common man while using the government to shield rich capital owners from risk on their side.

#42 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2018-09-12 04:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

A perfect snapshot of the rot that is at the core of our society's demise.

#1 | Posted by jpw

This is actually a perfect example of Stockholder Capitalism vs Stakeholder Capitalism. Stockholder Capitalism took root in the 1970s and changed everything.

Everyone should read "Who Stole the American Dream?" by Hedrick Smith.

#43 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2018-09-12 04:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Government enforced restrictions to competition allow and encourage this behavior. If an organization could get a competitive or generic drug approved for less than a billion dollars...

#16 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

The reason government limits generics for the first couple years is to encourage companies like this to develop new drugs. If they couldn't ban generics and copy pills, there would be literally no profit.

But what they are doing here is maximizing profit on a drug. This is how a free market works...the same one you champion on other threads.

#44 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-09-12 05:11 PM | Reply

"Government enforced restrictions to competition allow and encourage this behavior."

Thats not what the CEO said.

"I think it is a moral requirement to make money when you can," Mulye told the Financial Times, "to sell the product for the highest price."

Nothing at all to do with government.
Everything to do with morals.

So why would you deflect to government?
Because you're a Useful Idiot for the rich getting richer.

#45 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-09-12 05:15 PM | Reply

If someone had a way to extend or significantly improve the quality of your life, how much is that worth?

#46 | Posted by visitor_ at 2018-09-12 07:05 PM | Reply

#46

The answer of course is all the money and currently our health care companies are working very hard to get the price up to all the money. That obviously will leave no money for anything but health care. Exactly why health care doesn't work under standard free market principals.

In 2016 we spent 17.9% of GDP on health care the next closest was Switzerland at 12.4% That is 5.5% of our GDP that we can't spend on cars, homes, iphones, food etc. As health care demands more of our GDP everything else has to go down. In 2025 it is estimated to cost 19.9% of GDP so 1/5 of all the money made in the country will go towards extending our lives, at some point the quality of life will drop so much that living longer just won't be worth it.

The problem is there really is pretty near infinite price elasticity for health care products. We will pay what we have to in order to stay alive it's hard wired into us. I mean sure at some point the decision will be die of starvation or lack of health care and at that point you have reached the ideal price.

#47 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2018-09-12 07:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"If someone had a way to extend or significantly improve the quality of your life, how much is that worth?"

To me?
Nothing.
To me it would be more valuable to shorten your life.

#48 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-09-12 10:21 PM | Reply

To me it would be more valuable to shorten your life.

#48 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2018-09-12 10:21 PM | REPLY

Tough crowd tonight. lol

#49 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2018-09-12 10:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Capitalists are always seeking a monopoly position where they can charge outrageous prices. In the USA drug companies, doctors and lawyers enjoy such a position. As with ALL economic outcomes, this is not tied to any law of nature such as gravity. It is a consequence of political decisions made by people in power. It isn't that way in every country and we don't have to put up with it. It is a consequence of humans implementing libertarian policies, which also happened to be the cause of the 2008 financial crisis, tens of millions of people losing their homes and becoming permanent renters (think feudal system) while the1% profited from fraud. Nature is amoral. No system designed by humans is amoral. Our political system was designed by elites for the benefit of elites, but masquerading as a free democracy.

#50 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-09-13 11:08 AM | Reply

Is there a word for the economic system that confiscates the property of producers and forces them to work for the good of all?

#51 | Posted by visitor_ at 2018-09-13 11:20 AM | Reply

Is there a word for the economic system that confiscates the property of producers and forces them to work for the good of all?
#51 | POSTED BY VISITOR_ AT 2018-09-13 11:20 AM

'Moral'. I also like 'ethical'.

#52 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2018-09-13 12:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Is there a word for the economic system that confiscates the property of producers and forces them to work for the good of all?

#51 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

What "producers"? This guy isn't producing anything. He's simply gouging the consumers of this medication in order to reward shareholders. Shareholders who are also producing nothing to receive said rewards. And for being in the position as shareholders, they get to pay far lower taxes on their gains than many people who actually 'produce' for a living.

#53 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2018-09-13 06:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Is there a word for the economic system that confiscates the property of producers and forces them to work for the good of all?"

Yes there is.
It's called having a wife and kids.

#54 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-09-13 06:48 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Capitalists are always seeking a monopoly position where they can charge outrageous prices. In the USA drug companies, doctors and lawyers enjoy such a position.

I'm a primary care physician who works for a hospital. They set the prices. Enlighten me how I'm somehow on any same footing as a multi-billion dollar corporation.

Doctors can't even organize due to antitrust laws specific to their field.

#55 | Posted by zarnon at 2018-09-13 10:52 PM | Reply

#55, an individual doctor does not have the same monopoly power as a company with a patented drug. But the licensing system provides US doctors some market protection, which also serves to protect the public from quacks. Still, US doctors earn double the salaries as UK doctors, on average, although that figure varies by specialty. Clinics and hospitals enjoy a natural monopoly with patients in their surrounding area. There are many examples of pricing differences on the order of hundreds for the same service between hospitals. Some of the extra costs doctors bill for has nothing to do with health care, but compensates them for the time it takes to get paid by insurance companies and patients. The Kaiser system dramatically reduces this problem.

Many of the fake free market thinkers on this site incorrectly assume wealth accumulation is on account of productivity. That simply is not always true. Landlords collecting rents while they eat and sleep are not productive people. But, in our economy, the greatest share of profits accrue to our least productive citizens in finance, insurance and real estate. These people all practice paper shuffling, which is a non-productive overhead to the cost of conducting business. Doctors, auto mechanicS, garbage men, fry cooks are a few of the thousands of productive members of society. Speculators, bankers, landlords do nothing productive, they merely shuffle paper for personal gain while making the country less competitive.

#56 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-09-14 09:02 AM | Reply

"Is there a word for the economic system that confiscates the property of producers and forces them to work for the good of all?"

Of course. There are several examples. WE all support the military, the intelligence services, the Federal Government and all its agencies. Then there is Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. There are Federal and military pensions.

Secondly, Visitor would have had no problem back in the days of the founders when we could force people to work for nothing for the benefit of a few plantation owners. The Electoral College is a remnant from that era designed to offer the slave states more power than their populations of white male voters would have otherwise provided them. Today, he is still happy with the EC system because it still does what it was designed to do, give undeserved power to a minority to elect President and appoint SC Justices.

#57 | Posted by danni at 2018-09-14 12:22 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort