3 ms·
The other side might argue that the $330MM ultimately came from customers. If Citi didn't have to do such audits and no one complained, why should Citi be force
by basementcat 9y ago
The other side might argue that the $330MM ultimately came from customers. If Citi didn't have to do such audits and no one complained, why should Citi be forced to "wealth re-distribute" these funds from one set of customers to another set?
- paulmd 9y agoAh yes, the well-known "if they don't notice you took it, it's not a crime" loophole. And no, the money wouldn't come from customers, why would it? Citi is a for-profit entity, this came out of their profits.
- basementcat 9y agoProfits come from customers.
- toss1 9y agoRight, yes, so it doesn't matter how much they steal from customers. Got it.
- egypturnash 9y agoPresumably a bunch of that money ultimately came from the very same customers who are receiving this payout. The fact that it’s called a “refund” might help tip the other side off on this.
- traek 9y ago> why should Citi be forced to "wealth re-distribute" these funds from one set of customers to another set? Nothing leads me to believe that the second set is different from the first. In fact, the word “refund” suggests they’re the same.
- s73v3r_ 9y agoHow is this "wealth re-distribution"? Citi wasn't supposed to have that money in the first place.