I don't mean to disagree with you in spirit, but profitability is pretty closely entwined with probability. So companies are chasing solving problems that more people have, even if it's for the wrong reason.

▲

ehnto 2 hours ago | parent [-]

As the benefactor of an extremely rare disease, it's not exactly unfair when you look at it from a societal view. If you solve a higher probability problem, you are helping far more people.

The real tragedy isn't the allocation of the resources we have spare, it's that so many of our resources are not spare because billionares and corporations have hoarded it.

Without changing the percent of allocation, and only changing input resources by capturing it back from billionaires as taxes, we could be helping far more people including super rare diseases.

	▲	AdamN an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I don't know how much longer it will last but the US government invests significant resources into rare diseases in order to improve outcomes where the normal market wouldn't otherwise support the r&d.
	▲	silisili 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Absolutely. And if you take a step back and look at Covid spending, what it was spent on, and how much fraud was involved, it's absolutely maddening that the government isn't instead spending money on solving actual problems its constituents face. We basically just shoveled free money at anyone who claimed to have a business, to no real effect. C'est la vie, I guess.