Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 633 posts

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#621

Post by fastball »

usrusr wrote: post #590
fastball wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you favor harsher sentencing for him? As a hedge fund manager, losing money is not illegal. The only illegal thing he did was lie about it so that he could get them their money back. It would've been perfectly legal for him to lose all his clients money in the hedge fund, make them aware of this fact, and reap the profits from his pharma business without dishing it out to his hedge fund clients. As far as I ca…

If you lie about the nature of an investment your fund is doing it is fraud, even if the investment you have secretly been doing turns out to be successful.

I realize that it is fraud, but it's "lesser of two evils" fraud, which is why I personally favor lighter sentencing.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#622

Post by accountyaccount »

abvdasker wrote: post #559
accountyaccount wrote: post #533

Wait wait wait, he committed fraud... but everyone he defrauded actually ended up getting a 3X return on their investment because he just took money from another one of his ventures? I mean, illegal sure, but seems like he still held up his end of the bargain.

The thing about the law is that it largely exists as a deterrent for bad behavior, particularly behavior that causes systemic issues when it becomes widespread. Just because in this instance the parties being misled didn't lose their investments doesn't mean that the next time someone like Shkreli attempts this kind of scheme it won't end in disaster for the people he defrauds. It's kind-of like a speed limit. Sure,…

Sure, but if you get a ticket for doing 100 in a 50 you might be out a few hundred bucks. If you hit someone while doing 100 in a 50 you'll be in jail. Outcomes still matter.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#623

Post by 75dvtwin »

ceejayoz wrote: post #80
RunawayGalaxy wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, he claims that he gave the medicine away for free to people who could prove they couldn't afford it, so that he was really only screwing insurance companies. I believe that he was trying to draw media attention to the outrageous, legally-allowed colluding practices of the insurance and pharma industries. It would have been in his best interest to not draw attention to himself and slowly raise the price of the d…

> FWIW, he claims that he gave the medicine away for free to people who could prove they couldn't afford it, so that he was really only screwing insurance companies. Screwing insurance companies means increased costs for everyone . I'd really rather not pay 20% higher premiums every year to pad someone like Shkreli's pocketbook.

>Screwing insurance companies means increased costs for everyone. I'd really rather not pay 20% higher premiums every year to pad someone like Shkreli's pocketbook.\

- Medical malpractice insurance cost (to cover punitive damages)

- FDA approval process

all increase cost for everyone, who is 'found guilty' for that?

And what do you see public institutions of educations, from public schools to taxpayer funded universities do about that in their educational curriculum? How are children and students taught to analyze the causes of 'increasing costs'?

And what are the journalists, those 'beacons of truth' are doing in that regard? Is the coverage of those legimate reasons for higher cost getting anywhere similar of attention compared to Shkreli's?

(btw, not defending Shrkeli's actions ... have not studied this in detail, just surprised at this onesided moral outrage)

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#624

Post by RodericDay »

um_ya wrote: post #546
Alex3917 wrote: post #518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only illegal thing he did was lie about it so that he could get them their money back. You're missing the point; giving his investors 'their' money back was the thing he did that was unethical and illegal. If you're a fund manager and the value of your portfolio goes down after making bad bets, you can't just inject your own money into the fund to make it look like you have a positive track record so that you c…

You're grasping for ways to punish this guy because you don't like him. The fact is, he made a mistake and wanted to pay back the people he made a mistake with.

I'd say it's exactly the opposite. The guy blatantly broke the law, but you seem to he very attached to him because you see him as some kind of noble do-gooder.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#625

Post by aagha »

jjxw wrote: post #118

There seems to be a misconception regarding what Shkreli was found guilty of. The legal case here has very little to do with the pharmaceutical pricing controversy - it is a separate case based on a separate hedge fund that he managed. The gist of it is that he took people's money to start a hedge fund, lied to investors that the fund was doing fine when the hedge fund went belly up, but ended up returning everyone's…

Absolutely right.

Sadly, though: Screw folks by raising the cost of a life-saving drug by 5000%, business as usual. Screw over investors, go to jail.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#626

Post by rhcom2 »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #615
rhcom2 wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> virtue signaling I'm so tired of this buzzword. Why not take people at face value that they are actually expressing their own moral opinion on an issue and not assume they're doing it for "social standing"... on an anonymous internet forum. If you're looking for other behaviour that "makes the community worse" I think you should consider your own. Starting discussions with the assumption one side's opinions aren't…

It didn't lead to a flamewar. The issue is that expressing your own moral opinion is fashionable. It's considered acceptable to hold someone else's head under water just to raise your own. And that's toxic. Note that anyone who calls out virtue signaling soon ends up in the crosshairs. I don't mind though. Also, they were quite serious. And that's the problem. The fact that they're serious in calling out someone as a…

It's an internet forum. We're all expressing our own moral and general opinions. It's toxic to assume these opinions are not honestly held and write them off simply with another buzz word. The other poster didn't hold Shkreli's head under the water, his comments will not affect Martin at all. Plenty of people in this thread think he is a terrible person, you don't - that's fine, but it is still just an opinion. I don't see how that (or almost any) opinion is "dangerous" just because you disagree.

I don't know why you feel you're "in the crosshairs". You had no problem criticising the other poster, you should be able to take some criticism of your own.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#627

Post by sillysaurus3 »

rhcom2 wrote: post #626
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It didn't lead to a flamewar. The issue is that expressing your own moral opinion is fashionable. It's considered acceptable to hold someone else's head under water just to raise your own. And that's toxic. Note that anyone who calls out virtue signaling soon ends up in the crosshairs. I don't mind though. Also, they were quite serious. And that's the problem. The fact that they're serious in calling out someone as a…

It's an internet forum. We're all expressing our own moral and general opinions. It's toxic to assume these opinions are not honestly held and write them off simply with another buzz word. The other poster didn't hold Shkreli's head under the water, his comments will not affect Martin at all. Plenty of people in this thread think he is a terrible person, you don't - that's fine, but it is still just an opinion. I don…

It's toxic to assume these opinions are not honestly held and write them off simply with another buzz word.

You keep saying this, but nobody did that. Maybe that's where your anger is coming from. I clarified in my last comment that their opinions are honestly held, so at this point it seems like you're trying to misunderstand me.

I think you really dislike the term "virtue signaling." That's fine, but it doesn't change that that's what is happening here.

The fact that all of this stemmed from the idea that he is a terrible person for threatening to destroy an album as a joke is what makes this situation ludicrous. When the witch hunting mindset is so engrained in our culture, it becomes dangerous to those it targets.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#628

Post by rhcom2 »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #627
rhcom2 wrote: post #626

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an internet forum. We're all expressing our own moral and general opinions. It's toxic to assume these opinions are not honestly held and write them off simply with another buzz word. The other poster didn't hold Shkreli's head under the water, his comments will not affect Martin at all. Plenty of people in this thread think he is a terrible person, you don't - that's fine, but it is still just an opinion. I don…

It's toxic to assume these opinions are not honestly held and write them off simply with another buzz word. You keep saying this, but nobody did that. Maybe that's where your anger is coming from. I clarified in my last comment that their opinions are honestly held, so at this point it seems like you're trying to misunderstand me. I think you really dislike the term "virtue signaling." That's fine, but it doesn't cha…

I'm not angry at all, I'm just trying to tell you that if you're going to comment on what makes this community worse you need to consider your own behaviour.

> Since 2015, the term has become more commonly used as a pejorative characterization by commentators to criticize what they regard as the platitudinous, empty, or superficial support of certain political views" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling

You can see why I would misunderstand you because this is the definition of the word as I (and obviously others) understand it. So basically saying someone's opinions are "platitudinous, empty, or superficial" is both shitty way to try to have a conversation and a way to write people's opinions off. The wikipedia also pretty nicely sums up how it has become a misused buzzword without any actual meaning, unless you're a signalling theorist.

Re: Martin Shkreli is found guilty of securities fraud

#629

Post by totalZero »

accountyaccount wrote: post #622
abvdasker wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing about the law is that it largely exists as a deterrent for bad behavior, particularly behavior that causes systemic issues when it becomes widespread. Just because in this instance the parties being misled didn't lose their investments doesn't mean that the next time someone like Shkreli attempts this kind of scheme it won't end in disaster for the people he defrauds. It's kind-of like a speed limit. Sure,…

Sure, but if you get a ticket for doing 100 in a 50 you might be out a few hundred bucks. If you hit someone while doing 100 in a 50 you'll be in jail. Outcomes still matter.

We won't know if the outcome affected the punishment until he's sentenced, but it's likely to be the case here too.
Post reply on HN