Hacker News Reader

Comment by marricks | Hacker News Reader

“Three years of profit” over 25 years, not accounting for inflation.

Perhaps the first comment was too harsh but let’s not be overly generous.

> “Three years of profit” over 25 years, not accounting for inflation

It looks like an $8.9bn settlement after $7.4bn in litigation expenses [1]. I would guess that is a substantial portion of J&J's total profits from talc-based products, inflation adjusted. Were that product an independent company, this would have bankrupted it. That's decent deterrence.

[1] https://njbiz.com/jj-offers-8-9b-to-settle-claims-talc-produ...

If they spent such an inordinate amount trying to escape, that is not part of deterrence, it is a gamble that big boys can take and they took and it didn't go as well. That gamble, or at least a good part of 7 billion, is their own fault and doing and not an external punishment, and importantly, doesn't absolve the final punishment, not even morally. Even more crucial, that money went to the dirtiest type of rich law firms (it is kind of an offence on its own!) and not to settling the damages at all.

> spent such an inordinate amount trying to escape, that is not part of deterrence, it is a gamble that big boys can take

You’re claiming a tougher penalty would be fought less vigorously?

No, but it is always a moral decision somewhere to fight vigorously, and it is money thrown not at making things right. Oh but it is always done, it is routine, etc. Well? If a company is built to act, on behalf of board, as selfish as actually spending as much with lawyers (of course, because they want to make their point and hope to set a precedent that says: executives, do not refrain to do evil for a good buck! we can deal with that crapp later--and should we as a society find it okay that corporate america works like that, or can work like that?) as the amount they were finally charged, then we can reason that if they spent that much (almost the full penalty amount!) on a gamble, then the amount is not really a worthy punishment at all! Seen another way, almost as much cash flowed to faceless lawyer gentry as to making up for the thousands who had cancer! And is this supposed to be a healthcare company today? J&J laughs at the face of law-abiding society who is apparently powerless to deter, that is my thinking.

If you screw up you should stand up and take responsibility over that screw up. Not shy away and try to claim innocence. Honestly there should be a punishment on top of the actual penalty for a company that is proven to have intentionally done something like this.

If you know you screwed up and instead of taking ownership you play the blame game, if you lose the lawsuit, you should be responsible not just for the actual damages but also you should be required to payout 100% of your own lawyer fees to the defendant as well.

I’m not happy with a company causing provable harm with criminal negligence simply being deterred from doing it again. No, I want justice, I want them to be punished, because I want to see justice. I want all their profits taken away from them, and possibly even more.

I’m not even convinced this is actually a good deterrence. Companies have been criminally negligent since the birth of capitalism. They have caused immeasurable harm in multiple schemes in many ill guided attempts of making more and more money. These companies have gotten several fines, some CEOs have even been imprisoned, others have been forced into bankruptcy, and yet we see companies being criminally negligent, causing more harm, starting new malicious schemes, again and again. If these fines are supposed to be a deterrence, they are obviously not working.

I agree that we should find a better deterrence, but can we cool it with blaming “capitalism”? Is socialism some new drug that will suddenly eradicate selfishness? Has there ever been a documented case of a society that went socialist and no one did anything selfish? The problem isn’t the system, it’s the people.

There is no amount of “process improvement” that is gonna change basic human nature.

I never blamed capitalism for this. I merely stated that this happens under capitalism, and it keeps happening, even when the justice system is applied in an effort of deterrence.

Now I do believe that capitalism is a bad system that should be abolished. However I am aware that that isn’t going to happen any time soon. In the meantime I’ll settle for companies and CEOs being held responsible for the crimes they commit under the influence of the profit motive. I’d also be happy if we would do something to abolish the class of ultra-wealthy, or at the very least strip them off their influence over our democracy.

You are explicitly blaming capitalism for this, as you seem to imply some other system wouldn't allow for human greed and selfishness, but my point was that those are natural human traits and every single societal system ever conceived must deal with them. There is no system that can be created that will somehow magically remove those traits.

If you wanna abolish capitalism, what system do you think should take it's place that wouldn't have human selfishness?

Just to be clear:

> I merely stated that this happens under capitalism, and it keeps happening, even when the justice system is applied in an effort of deterrence.

is an explicit accusation against capitalism in exclusion of some other system.

As I said, above, humans have been negligent since time immemorial. People put in charge of companies in socialist systems are also criminally negligent, usually though there are even fewer consequences for them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com