this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2025
137 points (100.0% liked)

News

24403 readers
4376 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family have agreed to a $7.4 billion settlement over their role in the opioid crisis.

The deal, $1 billion larger than a previous 2024 proposal rejected by the Supreme Court, includes $6.5 billion from the Sacklers and $900 million from Purdue.

Funds will support opioid addiction treatment and prevention efforts.

The settlement, among the largest in U.S. history, still requires court approval.

Critics note the Sacklers' $11 billion withdrawals before Purdue’s bankruptcy, and victims emphasize the ongoing human cost of the crisis.

top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 62 points 1 week ago (2 children)

So they still made 3.5 billion at the end.

Fines for this stuff should start at gross profit over the entire period and build up from there.

Otherwise it's just a cost of business. Shit like this should bankrupt corporations and the board members controlling it. Make every stock worthless and then corporations would stop

[–] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The fundamental cause of the corporate behaviour is that by law their first priority is to make profit for the shareholders.

Fix that and things will change.

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Purdue was privately held. This was the family itself being greedy pieces of shit.

And corporations are not required to only focus on profit growth. Their duty to the shareholders is to see a return on their investment. That is very open to interpretation. Companies can definitely take a longer term growth strategy or even a slower one and pump out dividends.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

You don't even have to change that, but I'd love to see something that at least changed it to long term profits, like over 3-5 years, not quarterly where everything is running into the ground for every penny. We can even do that by changing how we tax stocks. The longer held, the less paid on taxes.

But even without that, well regulated capitalism is fine.

The real root problem is campaign finance deregulation which allows corporations to buy out both parties primaries for people who will make them more money, and further deregulate campaign finance so that the next round the politicians get more and are incentived to repeat.

Especially with how campaign "war chests" can roll over forever.

It's a snowball effect and the longer we ignore it the harder it is to fix. The harsh truth is most elected Dems at the federal level shouldn't be there and need to be replaced. We can't just wait for the rotten apples to fully rot to make space for new ones. We need to get them the fuck out the barrel

[–] grue@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Fines for this stuff should start at gross ~~profit~~ revenue over the entire period and build up from there.

FTFY. We should not give a fuck whether they were profitable when accounting for the harm they cause (especially since that basically just gives less competent perps a discount). If it sinks the company, so be it.

[–] apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not a fan of incarceration but that family should be in prison for life.

[–] triptrapper@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

At the very least they should lose every penny they have, and every penny they earn henceforth should go directly to the fund. Or am I just describing incarceration?

[–] apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The law protects property owners, so my interpretation is likely weak but asset forfeiture is normal in situations where assets are gained by illegal means. Seems easy to deduce that most of their wealth is derived from criminal activity.

[–] BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

I'm surprised Trump didn't find some way to interfere.