This only has legs if they’re developed without being largely government funded, which to my understanding isn’t true for a lot of drugs.

I think they'd justify that by saying they need to ensure the funds they need for future research on other breakthrough treatments. This is not entirely baseless, but just another nail in the coffin for why medical research shouldn't be funded primarily through capitalist methods.

A condition of public funding should be that aggregate internal rate of return, exclusive of executive team remuneration, should be published and capped, verified by independent audit.

The patent eventually expires and then the generics come out more cheaply.

There's a generic for Revlimid out now, in fact.

Don't worry, the government subsidies a huge portion of that research already.

You also arent funding the development of the drug that worked, but also the dozen that didnt.

Not saying they arent predatory, just that the math of "The pill only costs $0.25" is a massive oversimplification.

It's a public good. The company should be owned by the government and workers, ergo they don't need to make a profit.