Better yet, find a generic drug with a very small market place, and then raise the price 50 times.
Make sure the government has made it illegal to buy the drug from overseas (because of safety ) and make sure there are lots of regulations making it harder for other domestic drug manufacturers to enter the marketplace.
Then you have a captive market who isn’t allowed to buy from other vendors overseas, and other vendors domestically aren’t willing to set up shop to create the drug due to all the regulation involved in drug manufacturing.
You have one drug manufacturer, other domestic manufacturers aren’t willing to enter the marketplace and its illegal for your customers to buy the drug from overseas.
Thats why Daraprim costs $750 a pill in the US but costs $0.25 a pill in Australia.
There is a movement afoot in this country to control the populace and create/sustain a few billionaires by making drinking water unobtainable except through purchase. It’s not just Flint MI guys. The EPA has given permission to industry to do basically whatever they wish to the waterways and groundwater. Eventually it will be impossible to make well water healthy throughout large swaths of the country, and people who had lived independently from the large utilities will be forced to hook up to sewer and water. Even then, the taps will produce a “clean” greywater not suitable for drinking. Drinking water will have to be purchased retail.
A big contributor to this are the fracking companies, whose activities also cause earthquakes. It should be illegal to cause an earthquake. Just sayin’. The profits these companies are earning are skyrocketing, and the problems they cause will be suffered by our great-grand-children.
So legislators failing to protect basic livability of the environment is the greatest crime that will ever be nonpunishable.
There are states in the US where it is legal to marry off your 13 year old daughter. In fact, in 25 states there is no legal minimum age for marriage. Not too many boys getting married off that young though.
What the Enron guys did was pretty awful. They gamed the electric utilities in three states, causing huge brownouts in California simply to force higher profits. Then when they saw the jig was up, they sold off their stock, thus tanking the value of the employees retirement funds. So, millions of families struggling and living without basic utilities, thousands of elderly couples destitute, and enforcement officers had to search for a crime with which to charge them. In the end, they finally sent them to jail for lying about their losses to Wall Street investors. Those who couldn’t be connected to those actions went free.
Hire yourself out as a gestational mother for a couple, agreeing to carry their genetic child in exchange for their supporting you all through the pregnancy and paying all the medical bills. After the baby is born, insist on keeping it and having the couple pay child support.
Inciting other people to break the law. It’s generally not considered to be a crime itself as it’s protected by free speech. But when you get on a public forum and encourage your audience to target somebody, you’re causing violent crimes to happen.
My first reaction is running for political office. After that I would say some of the things done under freedom of speech and/or expression. Some of the visual arts really push the line into various forms of porn that could be considered illegal had someone not famous produced them. And even then ------- some can get into some real debates. Sally Mann and others spring to mind.
A competitor on Survivor a few seasons back outed one of his fellow cast members as a trans man in front of the entire cast & crew, assuming that everybody except a few of the players knew. The transman was effectively closeted–he had moved to a new state and cut off all ties with his previous life when he began his transition, and he had only come out to a very few people in his new life. The producers talked with him about it before they aired the episode; there was no way they could have kept people from talking about it for the rest of the season, and if they didn’t show why, it would have seemed very weird.
My understanding is membership clubs(Sam’s Club, Costco) have it in the membership agreement that showing a receipt is required. Regular stores are not really allowed to enforce any policy like that. I think.
There is a [del]word[/del] term for that: “Stochastic Terrorism”. When you (person of note) say, “Somebody ought to kill that guy,” and then some crazy person kills that guy, you need to take responsibility for requesting that guy’s death, rather that cowering away to, “I didn’t think someone would actually do it.”
This is the thread winner, IMHO. There are no legal consequences for a POTUS who initiates a nuclear first strike (unless someone wants to enact some sort of ex post facto justice afterwards.)
Most other things suggested in this thread, by contrast, would merely affect only one or a few people.
Unusual? Absolutely.
Sick? Yup.
Immoral? I’m not so sure about that one. (& I’ve already stated it’s not something that I’d personally do.)
Our political system is completely, utterly broken; there’s far too much money in it. IMHO, the USSC blew the Citizens United decision. Second, there should be term limits for every elected orifice.
Avoid stepping on your own tail, though. Decapitalizing the political system is hard. Very hard. Term limits (which should be the soft, you can come back in a while, kind) is comparatively easy. So we would end up doing the thing we can, the easy thing first. But that only ends up increasing the weight of money in the system, which makes doing the hard thing even harder.
It is a crime in many countries, though. Still, if you’re subtle, you can get away with it. It was the plot of an Agatha Christie Poirot novel. Spoilers for the whole plot, so if you haven’t read or seen Curtain and think you might, don’t click:
Poirot realises that a series of murders and strange deaths have been incited by a very clever, amoral sociopath, who preys on his victims’ fears, tells them half-truths, and is so persuasive - it makes sense in the book - that he can turn otherwise non-murderous people into killers. He broke no crime at all, but for Poirot he’s one of the worst criminals he’s ever encountered. In the end, Poirot, who’s a devout Catholic and believes murder is wrong and he might go to hell if he does it, kills the man. He has now saved lots of other people, but since the man managed to persuade even Poirot to become a murderer, he has, in a way, won.
) and make sure there are lots of regulations making it harder for other domestic drug manufacturers to enter the marketplace.