|
Carl wrote: > Your model is the basis of socialism. Carl, slow down. It's not my model; it's that used by the major drug companies. Let me quote the CEO of GlaxoSmithKline, Jean-Pierre Garnier, from an interview with CNN: "In the least developed nations we make no profits with the AIDS drugs. But somebody has to pay for R&D and that's why we charge higher prices in Europe and the U.S. In a sense we are asking the rich countries to pay for R&D and we are providing drugs basically at the lowest possible cost to the least developed nations." If you re-read my posting I think you will find it was politically neutral. I merely said there were 2 choices: a flat price where not everyone would get the drugs they needed or a tiered one in which some consumers bore a larger burden of the R&D costs. I made no value judgement about either choice, although you made it clear which you prefer. I must say I've always found tiered pricing for software distasteful myself. I thought I understood the economic case for it but I must admit I'd never realised that IBM's pricing policy was motivated by socialism. Dave... "Seriousness is the only refuge of the shallow." - Oscar Wilde ======================================================= The opinions expressed in this communication are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.