What does cost have to do with price?
There seems to be an assumption in this thread that there should be a correlation between the cost to produce an item, and the price charged for it (other than the price is generally at least the cost). In a capitalistic system, the price a seller charges for an item is what what enough customers will pay for it. The more customers want an item, the more the seller can charge. Is the price for a painting by a famous artist based on the cost of the canvas and paints and other supplies used to produce the painting? Of course not! If one can produce an item for 10 cents that people are willing to pay $100 for, what is wrong with that?
Of course, if one feels that the capitalistic model is inherently immoral, then one's take on this would be quite different.