[HN Gopher] In the US opioid-maker Purdue is bankrupt. Its globa...
___________________________________________________________________
In the US opioid-maker Purdue is bankrupt. Its global counterparts
make millions
Author : MilnerRoute
Score : 56 points
Date : 2024-09-21 19:54 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.washingtonpost.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.washingtonpost.com)
| yieldcrv wrote:
| Its US liabilities and creditors exceed its US assets
|
| Bankrupt doesn't mean you don't have any money, it means someone
| else sorts out whats in that particular bucket of assets
|
| I'm not familiar with what people actually want to occur or how
| it makes sense, I feel like its a derivative of prosperity
| preaching where a code of behavior is rewarded with wealth and
| therefore opposing behavior is punished with no wealth for an
| arbitrary indefinite time period, but I don't see anything
| supporting that in all of history
| solardev wrote:
| Don't people just want things like this to pierce the corporate
| veil so the Sacklers could be individually prosecuted, and
| probably put away for life?
| blackeyeblitzar wrote:
| I've wondered about this too. On the one hand there are
| situations that deserve it. On the other hand I can see it
| opening up a new uncertainty for business. How do you draw
| the line?
| solardev wrote:
| Murderous intent seems like a pretty easy line...? If you
| know your product is unsafe and then proceed to sell it
| anyway, well, it's hard to have sympathy for your moral
| ambiguity.
| candiddevmike wrote:
| I'm all for opening up new uncertainties for businesses.
| Especially when they involve criminal intent.
| advael wrote:
| It's quite strange to me that business leaders love talking
| about how they are being rewarded for taking risks when
| it's used to justify disproportionate executive pay and
| stock buybacks for investors, but in all discussions of
| economic and even criminal regulation surrounding
| businesses, a business being made to accept some liability
| for putting others at risk is considered too risky for
| business. At present, large swaths of the business world
| are heavily subsidized by the government, can write off
| operating losses on their taxes, are often funded by hedge
| funds and investors who don't seem to mind them being
| deeply unprofitable for many years, and hold things like
| the IP rights produced by any worker they've employed as a
| treasure trove of potential value to sell off for the
| benefit of the owners should the business fail. On top of
| that, we must also believe that it's good and right that it
| is nearly impossible to prosecute any actual decision-maker
| within a company for criminal conduct done or harm caused
| by that company, or else business is just too risky and the
| economy might collapse?
|
| To me this doesn't even warrant consideration, it's
| ridiculous on its face and perverts the notion of rule of
| law
| jiggawatts wrote:
| The Sacklers made enough money to have some left over for
| bri.. political contributions.
|
| They're permanently immune to personal consequences now.
| howard941 wrote:
| I don't know about that but what's going on is the court is
| rejecting what the Sacklers want, which is getting out of the
| civil liability claims against Purdue. You can do that if the
| bankruptcy plan provides for co-debtor stays. Sometimes the
| co-debtors get approved with it, sometimes not. In this case?
| Not.
| wyldfire wrote:
| So some of the Sacklers' assets can be considered when
| settling accounts w Purdue's creditors?
| voxic11 wrote:
| No it's just that the sacklers didn't get civil immunity
| from their misconduct which they wanted in exchange for
| giving up some of their assets to creditors.
| GeekyBear wrote:
| After the fraudulent marketing claiming that their
| formulation was non-adictive, I certainly want to see the
| profits from Oxycontin clawed back from the Sackler family.
| bigtones wrote:
| Archived version: https://archive.li/VY7F3
| loeg wrote:
| Opioids continue to be over-vilified. They're very useful and
| beneficial drugs.
| loufe wrote:
| What makes you say "over-villified"? They are a very dangerous
| yet effective tool, true. However, Western society is still
| reeling from the opiod crisis. I have a hard time feeling like
| it's over-villified, from my perspective it is only now feeling
| appropriately villified.
| dyauspitr wrote:
| Well we're just recovering from a phase where they were
| overprescribed so there's a natural overvilification. Lots of
| people that do need opioids for their pain are now getting
| refused.
| loeg wrote:
| They've been underprescribed for probably a decade now. We
| started overcorrecting long, long ago.
|
| https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6626a4.htm#:~:text
| =....
|
| > First, average daily MME per prescription decreased after
| 2010, both nationwide and in most counties. The largest
| decreases occurred from 2010 to 2012, following publication
| of two national guidelines defining high-dose opioid
| prescribing as >200 MME/day (15,16). ... Nationally, opioid
| prescribing rates leveled off from 2010 to 2012, and then
| decreased by 13.1% from 2012 to 2015. ... This pattern,
| along with the trends in overall numbers of opioid
| prescriptions, might reflect fewer patients initiated on
| opioid therapy after 2012...
| dyauspitr wrote:
| Has it really been that long? It feels like the opioid
| epidemic was not that long ago.
| loeg wrote:
| Well, ten years is both a long time and not that long,
| you know? But yes US prescriptions peaked in ~2012.
| danielheath wrote:
| Opioid dependency lags prescription rates pretty
| significantly - it can take years before someone is in a
| position to shake the addiction.
| loeg wrote:
| > What makes you say "over-villified"?
|
| This article, of course. The obsession with investigating
| every possible company that has ever been remotely associated
| with the Sacklers. Etc.
| secondcoming wrote:
| 'Western society' might be a stretch.
| hansoolo wrote:
| Agreed
| legitster wrote:
| That's the weirdest thing about this whole saga. Opioids are not
| illegal, they haven't been removed from insurance or Medicare
| coverage, and doctors are still free to over-prescribe them with
| little to no repercussions.
|
| It's kind of like if Ford got sued out of existence for every
| traffic death, but every other manufacturer got to keep making
| cars.
| rqtwteye wrote:
| Ford should get sued out of existence if they knowingly shipped
| defective cars while internally knowing that their cars kill
| people. The Purdue people knew that their public statements
| about the addictiveness of Oxycontin were wrong.
| appendix-rock wrote:
| I've got the beginning of a movie staring Edward Norton and
| Brad Pitt that you might be interested in.
| fragmede wrote:
| You mean the Ford Pinto case that was actually real, and
| lead to 27 deaths?
|
| https://medium.com/@GallowayJefcoat/tyler-durden-was-
| right-a...
| techjamie wrote:
| They came pretty close with the Ford Pinto, after determining
| that the wrongful death lawsuits would be cheaper than doing
| a recall.
|
| https://www.spokesman.com/blogs/autos/2008/oct/17/pinto-
| memo...
| njbooher wrote:
| Why would we make a highly effective class of painkillers
| illegal because of one bad actor?
| rqtwteye wrote:
| The only way to deal with this is to go after the execs
| personally who are responsible for corporate wrongdoing.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-09-21 23:00 UTC)