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

How the Sacklers shifted $10.8B of an opioid fortune built on OxyContin

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 230 posts

Re: How the Sacklers shifted $10.8B of an opioid fortune built on OxyContin

#131

Post by unishark »

sunstone wrote: post #71
wombatmobile wrote: post #2

If we had a justice system, that $10.8 billion would be recoverable, and used to try to rehabilitate the victims. But we don't have a justice system. We have a legal system, and a financial system.

According to the article $4.8bn of the $10.8bn has already been paid in tax. So that portion has been 'recovered'. The remaining $6bn though is still in play. What I don't see being mentioned is jail time. So it's not criminal to push habit forming narcotics from behind a corporate curtain?

They also offered a $10B settlement which is mentioned near the end of the article.

Re: How the Sacklers shifted $10.8B of an opioid fortune built on OxyContin

#132

Post by toiletfuneral »

ryandrake wrote: post #92
Dirlewanger wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting take. I've always held that Americans only care about those that they can see from the edge of their property line (neighbors and whatnot). Everyone else? Fuck em. Distrust of all forms of government is practically bred into us, and it shows at all levels. Corporations have pretty much filled that power vacuum.

Plus, we Americans embrace or at least excuse this corporate power. Elected government tries to control what we can say online? Censorship! Overreach! Unaccountable Facebook and Twitter try to control what we say online? Yes, please! No problem! If you don't like it, leave! It's not censorship because corporate power is doing it rather than government power!

[dead]

Re: How the Sacklers shifted $10.8B of an opioid fortune built on OxyContin

#133

Post by boomboomsubban »

at_a_remove wrote: post #69
blendergeek wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why don’t doctors unions throw out members who would claim to have been hoodwinked by pharmaceutical companies? If the companies are lying about safety, how are the doctors supposed to know? The only ones with the data necessary to know the dangers of these drugs are the manufacturers and the manufacturers were lying and covering up the dangers.

I think a casual understanding of history has numerous examples of opioids that were prescribed as being safe, and that people then got addicted to, and then we all moved on to the next one. Heroin was one, after all. I find it hard to imagine too many doctors who are unaware of the history. How they have chosen to view that history (psychiatry's triumphant " this time we got it right!" or perhaps simply shrinking aw…

Asking doctors to decide which research they should and should not trust based on their understanding of history seems like a more dangerous situation.

Re: How the Sacklers shifted $10.8B of an opioid fortune built on OxyContin

#134

Post by MegaButts »

ashtonkem wrote: post #91
bluntfang wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been thinking about this a lot, and really believe America was founded on "breaking the rules" and has had really great successes, but really awful consequences. Specific to the pandemic, no one wants to wear a mask. We've been conditioned to believe that breaking the rules (ie disruption) is a good way to move forward. Outside the pandemic, we see oil companies and other manufactures move their operations overs…

> Specific to the pandemic, no one wants to wear a mask. This is another one of those situations where the crazies are driving the conversation, because they are much louder than their actual portion of the population. According to Gallup the portion of their panel who “never” wear a mask outside of their home is 10%, while those who “rarely” wear a mask is 2%. The vast majority of the population wears masks “always”…

https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2013-04-07

Re: How the Sacklers shifted $10.8B of an opioid fortune built on OxyContin

#136

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

songshu wrote: post #13

I never understand why doctors are not blamed for prescribing these. Are doctors not supposed to be responsible for prescriptions? If they are not, should we stop allowing them to prescribe? Why don’t doctors unions throw out members who would claim to have been hoodwinked by pharmaceutical companies?

It's because doctors and hospitals are increasingly evaluated based on patient satisfaction instead of patient outcomes.

It's why you'll walk into a medical plaza lobby that looks like a 4-star hotel, with fountains and art on the wall, and why the doctor will write you a prescription for an absurd dose of narcotics after surgery. After you've been cut open, it's normal to be in some pain for a while, but if the doctor drugs you into such a daze that you feel nothing, you'll rate him or her more highly. Even if 9/10 people end up being fine and stop taking the drug when they're supposed to, 1/10 people have a new addition.

This is bizarre the end-result of the privatization of our medical system. We're just one step away from rating doctors with stars like Uber, where they offer you drugs instead of a free water bottle when you walk in.

Re: How the Sacklers shifted $10.8B of an opioid fortune built on OxyContin

#137

Post by unishark »

casraso wrote: post #4
wombatmobile wrote: post #2

If we had a justice system, that $10.8 billion would be recoverable, and used to try to rehabilitate the victims. But we don't have a justice system. We have a legal system, and a financial system.

This is why I am puzzled when people say 'you should fight your battles in the courts, not through protests'. It has always been about who can afford better lawyers, who can win the war of attrition, and a whole lot of luck along the way. Quite a few articles have showed up on HN the past week that reinforce this.

> This is why I am puzzled when people say 'you should fight your battles in the courts, not through protests'.

Sounds like it was worded wrong (depending what you mean by "protests"). "fight your battles in the courts" is generally a statement about non-violence, meant to suggest metaphorical fighting in courts instead of actual violence.

Re: How the Sacklers shifted $10.8B of an opioid fortune built on OxyContin

#138

Post by smolder »

mmm_grayons wrote: post #73
wombatmobile wrote: post #2

If we had a justice system, that $10.8 billion would be recoverable, and used to try to rehabilitate the victims. But we don't have a justice system. We have a legal system, and a financial system.

Is all that money tainted? While oxycontin holds a huge potential for abuse I know plenty of people who have taken it for real pain, been helped by it, and moved on. "Just take it all" doesn't sound like justice either.

Taking it all seems fair to me. When someone steals from a retailer, we don't just make them pay for it and send them on their way, because that doesn't disincentivize stealing in the first place. The Sacklers/Purdue would need to be punished for the predatory, antisocial scheme to prevent others like it.

Re: How the Sacklers shifted $10.8B of an opioid fortune built on OxyContin

#139

Post by itronitron »

bluntfang wrote: post #75
shrubble wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it. Frédéric Bastiat

I've been thinking about this a lot, and really believe America was founded on "breaking the rules" and has had really great successes, but really awful consequences. Specific to the pandemic, no one wants to wear a mask. We've been conditioned to believe that breaking the rules (ie disruption) is a good way to move forward. Outside the pandemic, we see oil companies and other manufactures move their operations overs…

A lot of US history boils down to criminals and cult leaders, whereas Europe is mostly about spoiled brats.

Re: How the Sacklers shifted $10.8B of an opioid fortune built on OxyContin

#140

Post by stallmanite »

stefan_ wrote: post #46
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Much of the money is diffucult to recover by being tied up in byzantine arrangements of LLCs and overseas accounts Yet this reporter was able to assemble the trail from court documents. For every person creating Byzantine structures there are several adept at untangling them. > Tell all of the poor defendants who have been held in Rikers for over a year without a trial Not arguing that they aren’t getting an advant…

"search warrant sacklers" 0 results It's hard to make a case for something being prosecuted in good faith if there is never any attempt at using the tools that are otherwise so vastly abused in prosecuting the most meaningless "crimes".

Very good point. People suspected of far less serious crimes based on far more tenuous “evidence” get their door kicked in, their kids rooms flashbanged, dogs shot, etc.
Post reply on HN