I'd like to challenge this. Yes, the patent system allows for a time-limited monopoly for the inventor of a drug - but it does not, to my knowledge, in any way "dictate prices" for that drug. That is up to the owner of the patent, who rationally will optimize for profit.
Optimizing for profit does not mean "charging as much as possible", either; it means "charging the amount resulting in the highest net profit". There is the supply and demand curve to take into account here.
Each invention or each venture needs resources. Where do you get those from? One can say, people give something and out of this pot you support something bigger (taxes? charity? venture capital?) , and those who have the idea, the skill, the howto, they go for them. And everyone of them has to support their own families too. So all in all, society gets a profit by having people creating treatment, workers get their profit (time+skill for money), investors get a profit and owners maybe get an overproportial share of, what is being paid for it.
I do not understand how this is a pessmistic view. I just see a lot of people being productive?
But i admit, it is an ideal. In generally i also only hear all the bad stories.