Your argument for price gouging.As I understand it it is a monopoly drug. What do you mean 'no?'Nice try, but.... no.Well in this case it is scarcity via government disaster, as the medicine in question is working under a government imposed monopoly.Not according to the legal definition of price gouging, which consistently relates to profiteering through scarcity caused by a natural disaster.Because it is price gouging.All of this demonstrates the beauty of the free market.
Not at all sure why some people immediately call for government action in a case like this.
There's no disaster involved, and so claims of price gouging cannot soundly apply.