431–440 of 446 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> initially he was convicted but since no one lost any money his sentencing guidelines were (...) So.. If I try to rob a bank and fail and no money is stolen, then the sentence should be reduced?
Running a hedge fund in completely different than robing a bank. You should use at least an iota of intelligence before commenting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>See his videos. You wouldn't stand a chance debating him unless you were a lawyer or pharmaceutical exec. I have. He's seemingly a intelligent guy with some personality issues that have gotten him into trouble. I hope he takes time during his sentence to seek help because he seemingly has more to offer the world than trolling and unethical professional behavior. Beside that, I don't care about Shkreli himself or the…
> I have. He's seemingly a intelligent guy with some personality issues that have gotten him into trouble. I hope he takes time during his sentence to seek help because he seemingly has more to offer the world than trolling and unethical professional behavior. Good point. Let's leave it at that because him helping the world is all that really matters. Wouldn't you agree that his childish behavior is a response to the…
It will be awful if his fellow inmates do to him what he did to patients.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This man is not an entrepreneur, and to try and say so is to insult and demean actual entrepreneurs everywhere. His investors got lucky that he had the funds to repay them due to his other company. Had he gotten away with this, he likely would have done it again, and those investors might not have been so lucky.
You can talk after you take a biotech company public.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fraud, securities fraud, and forgery would do as a start.
Who committed fraud, specifically? This always comes up and, while I agree that maybe things possibly weren't investigated enough, I don't think there are any clear examples of people who committed fraud and got away with it. A lot of people being stupid does not equal fraud.
The bottom line is, for the 2007/8 crisis, there are hundreds if not thousands of people guilty of fraudulent misrepresentations, and for inventing their own laws, with no reprecussions. I think the most egregious case is the "robo-signing" and MERS case (which are intertwined), which appear to involve thousands of cases of perjury, non of which were prosecuted, or even investigated -- but the publicly available evidence is damning enough, even if no justice official decided to investigate.
But why go back so far? So far, the recent wells fargo fraudulent account opening case [0] has resulted in a slap on the wrist and no one being charged. I don't know who committed fraud specifically, and it seems no one who can find out wishes to find out either. In 8 years, someone like you is going to ask "but who specifically committed fraud? this always comes up". There are clear examples of fraud; if there aren't clear examples of who committed that fraud, it is only because the powers that be decided they do not want to know.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wells_Fargo_account_fraud_scan...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He wasn't charged for raising the price of daraprim. That wasn't illegal. Defrauding investors is illegal. I highly doubt the case will be overturned.
Would you like to bet on it? I've got $100 that says his sentence will be reduced by at least 50%.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can talk after you take a biotech company public.
no, we can talk about the fact that using fraud to fund legitimate activity isn't entrepreneurship, now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you like to bet on it? I've got $100 that says his sentence will be reduced by at least 50%.
Sure. Know a good betting platform? Maybe his sentence will be reduced somewhat, but I doubt by half. Also, we'll need to remove time-off for good behavior (which everyone gets by default unless they get in trouble) as part of the bet. 7+ years for defrauding investors is not uncommon, regardless of the other circumstances around the case and the defendant.
[1] Actually, slightly more than 6 years because Congress is completely incompetent: http://famm.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/FAQ-Federal-Good-....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, in the United States they're generally passed on to the insured's employer . There are several negative aspects of that, but the big one is that the patient is less likely to complain about being overcharged if someone else is paying for it. The whole idea of employer-paid insurance in the U.S. is an artifact of some tax law jiggery pokery back in (if I'm remembering right) the Depression/WWII era. Before that pe…
> No, in the United States they're generally passed on to the insured's employer. Who takes them out of the total amount they are willing to pay for labor, so it still comes from the insured.
See also: the way that most people view a tax refund as "free money" that the government is "giving" them, rather than them having given the government an interest-free loan of that money (which is the actual case).
When they get a (partial) refund of the taxes withheld, they're happy, rather than being disappointed that they've had too much withheld (as homo economicus would).
If, instead, no taxes were withheld and they were forced to come up with the (non-refunded) portion in a lump sum payment once a year they'd be outraged.
Human psychology and math don't really overlap that much.
In one sense, yes, the money the employer pays would be available for wages, but the problem is that any savings would come out of a pool of potential wages for all employees. There is no direct incentive for an individual employee to save money on health care, because those savings will make zero impact on his paycheck.
One way of trying to get around this is, of course, the "copay". If the employee saves money, he does, in most cases, have a somewhat smaller copay. But the incentive isn't nearly as high as it would be if all the savings accrued directly to the employee.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fraud, securities fraud, and forgery would do as a start.
Who committed fraud, specifically? This always comes up and, while I agree that maybe things possibly weren't investigated enough, I don't think there are any clear examples of people who committed fraud and got away with it. A lot of people being stupid does not equal fraud.