Hacker News Reader

Also iirc the shkreli case is strange since no one actually suffered any damages.

According to him (in an interview) he only jacked the prices up for insurance companies.

Which makes every single person with insurance a (diffuse) victim. Let's not pretend that exorbitant pricing doesn't have any relation to the high cost of medical insurance/care, which in turn of course indirectly kills people.

Drop the tone. All I said is his pharmaceutical practices were 1. legal 2. didn't have direct effect on the consumers of the medicines.

Skherli said he gave the medicine free to those who have no insurance. I don't think by good heart but rather to avoid a major bad publicity from the inability of non-insured to pay.

I won't. The notion that Shkreli did next to nothing wrong because he only gouged insurance companies is one I have seen echoed too much. It bears refuting when it comes up lest people see such assertions go unchallenged and don't consider the implications.

Shkreli is not in jail for that. The "shkreli case" specifically refers to a securities case, unrelated to retrophin. And it is that, specifically, where there were no damages.

specifically referring to the securities case. He's not in jail for manipulating the price of pharmaceuticals.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com