World Malaria Day

This was well put together.

Vestegaard Frandsen has created a highly specialized 'niche market' which allows them to profit by selling mosquito nets to impoverished peoples. A market based solution to malaria is unethical. Example: If a persons house is burning down and I offer to sell him water to put it out at a profit, it would be considered immoral. Is this not obvious.

BeaucoupRed - I don't work for this company but I'm still insulted. This company saves lives - there is nothing immoral or unethical about that. Period.

Here's the deal, you find me a non-market solution that produces mosquito nets as duralble, as reliable, and in as large a quantity as that produced by Vestergaard-Frandsen and I'll endorse that instead.

If not, than you are talking about idle theory that has no real-world impact.

It's well understood that you are not an employee of VF. It's also OK to be insulted by what was said. Real human motives can be shocking when viewed through a honest lense. I applaud the model you have constructed to provide aid to struggling peoples. Yours is clearly the gold standard from a ethical point of view.

Vestegaard Frandsen however is chiefly concerned with Return On Investment. Without ROI this company would have it's focus fixed elsewhere. Con't >>>

On the one hand, I see where you're coming from. I've encountered a lot of people and organizations that have motives other than helping the poor. Customs agents want their 'cut' (bribe) when bringing in aid, NGO people want their salaries first, and contractors (e.g. construction) want their profit. It would be great if all who helped the poor did it for free.

BUT, at the same time, the profit-motive of VF has created one of the best damn life saving products out there.

And they created this product because they had to compete in a market environment. I have seen that when life saving devices and products meant to help the poor are left to an exclusively non-competitive market, they can often be bloated, inefficient, and full of aspects which don't help the poor.

The PermaNet is the best damn life saving product out there and it could only exist due to the fact it was made in a market economy.

>>> When a private company benefits from providing services to the poor, the incentive to find a lasting solution is lost. This market based model fosters corporate dependancy on the problem itself. Once a private company flourishes in this type of environment they will vehemently oppose a option that challenges their bottom line.

Please see my reply to "Uncultured Project" below.