Discussion in 'Community' started by Adam of Nuchtern, Mar 4, 2013.
well then, that's settled. i guess there's nothing left to do but wait for the reports of mass charitable donations of ARVs from drug companies to roll in. PRAISE JESUS THE FREE MARKET JESUS? THE FREE MARKET!
I sure hope God cures this thread.
Nice went out the window the second you sided with Ten
The concept of corporate charity gets quite a bit of discussion in corporations class, precisely because of fiduciary duty to shareholders. In the end, the argument is that you should pay out the dividend, let the shareholder decide if he wants to make a donation and, if so,to whom. But from a practical standpoint, winning that kind of derivative suit is very difficult because of the BJR. Especially on a jurisdiction like Delaware or even New York.
And Ten's assertion about going to jail was just flat out wrong, confused criminal law with civil and corporate law.
Sorry for getting snippy, though. Just jealous of the "Smartest JCCer" award.
It's funny because I was fairly certain I heard GrandAdmiralJello mention he was doing Law.
Yes, God has blessed this world by allowing millions of people to die from AIDS and only just now deciding to provide scientists with the knowledge to cure it. Such a loving god! I suppose God wanted this particular child to survive, but is saying "**** you" to everyone else who has suffered from this disease.
I'll start this by saying that I know people who are involved in some of these programs, they're not sociopaths, they tend to be more granola hippie types who realize that they do share some rather strange bedfellows. I'm not going to deny that much of it is done by the drug companies to get their products out into other countries and get a leg up on the competition which comes from generic drugs, but to say that it isn't going on is, well, how should I put this - talking out of your ***, brah. Yet again. Links are below.
Start on page 2, specifically the part where it mentions Merck donating $50 million and antiretroviral drugs.
Here they are doing it again.
Whaddya know, more of those dastardly drug companies and their sociopathic CEOs sponsoring and donating HIV/AIDS treatments, again...
Doesn't make me an expert. Far from it, really. I'm perfectly fine conceding that I am not in my element here.
YOU WOULDN'T DOWNLOAD A CURE
Playing devil's advocate (or, as Iello would prefer, Advocatus Diaboli) a bit for the drug companies: Whatever else you want to say about this, it's a pretty astounding accomplishment that, after only three decades of extensive research, a cure for AIDS has possibly been found. Certainly political pressure played a significant role, but a tremendous amount of credit is owed to those dastardly drug companies, who have poured tremendous sums into research. Those investment decisions were made not because of any ideological reasons, but first and foremost because of their profit motive. Does anyone think they'd have invested that money if they didn't expect to make money on it in the future? Would you?
As I told Iello in a pm, he's not really that far off the mark: the fiduciary duty/duty of care to the shareholders is the theoretical argument against corporate charity. My point (aside form that Rogue Ten was clueless with his talk of going to jail) was that, as a practical matter, the business judgment rule makes it incredibly difficult to succeed in a shareholder derivative suit against company management. That said, if you confronted the hypothetical CEO as to why he didn't donate the drugs/technologyas suggested, I could pretty much guarantee you that he would invoke his fiduciary duty to the shareholders.
Uhhh, how do you think we made/make HIV/AIDS again?
I'm used to reading religious shenanigans on here and mostly tune it out now, but I just have to know how you think we made HIV. Like...in a biotech lab somewhere or are you talking the being frisky with chimps myth or are you talking your god hates gay people or what?
There are conspiratards who believe that.
I suspect that he - like many religious fundamentalists - sincerely believe that AIDS/HIV is "God's" punishment against sinners (or rather, teh gayz), rather than a man-made biological weapon that the scientists that "created" it were unable or unwilling to destroy. Because that makes so much more sense.
Go science! I liked shirtwoot!'s reference to this yesterday.
My guess is he's going to say we created AIDS by sinning or whatever. Which is bull****. But whatever.
Okay, but would you if you didn't think that it would help you score with Miss Venezuela?
I am to getting laid as corporations are to profit.
I knew we shared a special connection.
Maybe God figured that he hadn't punished us enough yet, so in the late 70s/early 80s, he decided to concoct a new virus and give it to gay people. Then he sat around waiting and laughing at the suffering the virus caused for more than 30 years until finally relenting and letting one child possibly get cured. Did I get that right?
I'm sorry, I saw the first page and skimmed the rest but I have not kept up. Did a treatment potential for HIV turn into a religious flame war? Really? Really?