You still pay for it, and thanks to patent protection, you need to pay that particular company for it if you don't want to be dead.
Why must the pharma company answer solely to shareholders? They are doing medicine - they also have an obligation to do right by the public. Generally, when a medical professional fails to do right by the public, they get replaced with one that will.
For many medicines, I have absolutely zero choice in that relationship. It's <Company> selling <Drug that I need to not die>, or the highway (Not to mention that I'm not choosing the medicine - my doctor is prescribing it.). If that is choice, then so is not paying taxes.
To be consistent with your position, preferential reporting by anyone with an involuntary relationship with their 'customer' base should be illegal. This would disqualify most pharma companies right off the bat.
Why must the pharma company answer solely to shareholders? They are doing medicine - they also have an obligation to do right by the public. Generally, when a medical professional fails to do right by the public, they get replaced with one that will.
For many medicines, I have absolutely zero choice in that relationship. It's <Company> selling <Drug that I need to not die>, or the highway (Not to mention that I'm not choosing the medicine - my doctor is prescribing it.). If that is choice, then so is not paying taxes.
To be consistent with your position, preferential reporting by anyone with an involuntary relationship with their 'customer' base should be illegal. This would disqualify most pharma companies right off the bat.