4 ms·

What crime did each of those executives commit? That’s what needs to be answered. Otherwise your comment reads like a mob chanting “We want blood!” Being greed

by koolba 8y ago

What crime did each of those executives commit? That’s what needs to be answered. Otherwise your comment reads like a mob chanting “We want blood!” Being greedy is not a crime. Taking advantage of lax regulations is not a crime. Being bailed out with tax dollars for risks that paid you off privately if they won is not a crime.

rhaps0dy 8y ago
> Being greedy is not a crime. Taking advantage of lax regulations is not a crime. Being bailed out with tax dollars for risks that paid you off privately if they won is not a crime. Maybe that's your point, but therein lies the problem. Doing all these things has an upside but no downside, therefore we're encouraging antisocial behaviour.
chiefalchemist 8y ago
Some would probably settle for blood. However, plenty of others aren't interested in that. What they seek is simply what we are told the republic promises us and the rest of the world. That is, justice. Instead, per the article, there was no justice and no closure. __And__ the voice(s) of the mob(s) - in the absence of justice - are raising louder and louder. The impact from 2008 is far from over.
crispyambulance 8y ago
I see this sentiment fairly regularly on HN. It's the idea that laws can sufficiently encapsulate ethical behavior (the rules) when they're strictly enforced, that they're the best thing we got, so live with it. But there are many behaviors which aren't "crimes" but which are morally repulsive. The danger of not reacting, one way or another, to such inequities is that people lose faith in the system. Already, the election of Trump and rise of fascist sentiments everywhere are like a giant "fuck you" to politics as usual. It can get much worse. At some point, as one billionaire said, "the pitchforks are coming". I don't think we'll be able to avoid it the way things are going.
- koolba 8y ago
  > I see this sentiment fairly regularly on HN. It's the idea that laws can sufficiently encapsulate ethical behavior (the rules) when they're strictly enforced, that they're the best thing we got, so live with it. > But there are many behaviors which aren't "crimes" but which are morally repulsive. I don't agree with that concept. I don't think it's possible to legislate morality and the entire concept is downright scary. What's even more scary though is metering out justice based on perceived morality. Justice needs to be impartial, otherwise you're literally putting people in jail because your dislike them. > The danger of not reacting, one way or another, to such inequities is that people lose faith in the system. Already, the election of Trump and rise of fascist sentiments everywhere are like a giant "fuck you" to politics as usual. On the contrary, I see the election of Trump as a demonstration of people's faith in the system. It worked as intended and they got what they (electorally speaking) asked for. > It can get much worse. At some point, as one billionaire said, "the pitchforks are coming". I don't think we'll be able to avoid it the way things are going. I really doubt that. I've got significantly more faith in our shared humanity and the rule of law. I do find it disturbing how a lot of the politics on the left has shifted from policy disagreement to directly stoking violence. But it'll eventually pass. Unemployment and immigration policy is at a tipping point where the only choice for employers is going to be rising wages. The left is going to have a hard time arguing that's a bad thing.
  - sokoloff 8y ago
    > The left is going to have a hard time arguing [rising wages are] a bad thing. Why would the left argue that rising wages is a bad thing anyway? It seems that a significant subset of the left has been beating the “we need higher minimum wages and more wage growth overall" drum for a while. Is it just because they strictly prefer a governmental rather than a natural market solution? Or something else?
    - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
      I believe that koolba's point was about rising wages in relation to immigration policy. That is, wages rise further if we let fewer immigrants in. But that's a problem for the left, which wants rising wages, but also wants a liberal immigration policy.
voodootrucker 8y ago
The crime was massive fraud by the credit rating agencies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_rating_agencies_and_the_subprime_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_rating_agencies_and_the...
- umanwizard 8y ago
  As I commented elsewhere credit rating agencies are not the same things as banks. Why should bank executives be prosecuted for something credit rating agencies did?
inthewoods 8y ago
Dick Fuld significantly misrepresented the actual financial health and leverage of Lehman on public financial documents. Pretty clear Sarbox infraction. Nothing happened to him.

by koolba 8y ago

rhaps0dy 8y ago

> Being greedy is not a crime. Taking advantage of lax regulations is not a crime. Being bailed out with tax dollars for risks that paid you off privately if they won is not a crime. Maybe that's your point, but therein lies the problem. Doing all these things has an upside but no downside, therefore we're encouraging antisocial behaviour.

chiefalchemist 8y ago

Some would probably settle for blood. However, plenty of others aren't interested in that. What they seek is simply what we are told the republic promises us and the rest of the world. That is, justice. Instead, per the article, there was no justice and no closure. __And__ the voice(s) of the mob(s) - in the absence of justice - are raising louder and louder. The impact from 2008 is far from over.

crispyambulance 8y ago

I see this sentiment fairly regularly on HN. It's the idea that laws can sufficiently encapsulate ethical behavior (the rules) when they're strictly enforced, that they're the best thing we got, so live with it. But there are many behaviors which aren't "crimes" but which are morally repulsive. The danger of not reacting, one way or another, to such inequities is that people lose faith in the system. Already, the election of Trump and rise of fascist sentiments everywhere are like a giant "fuck you" to politics as usual. It can get much worse. At some point, as one billionaire said, "the pitchforks are coming". I don't think we'll be able to avoid it the way things are going.

koolba 8y ago
> I see this sentiment fairly regularly on HN. It's the idea that laws can sufficiently encapsulate ethical behavior (the rules) when they're strictly enforced, that they're the best thing we got, so live with it. > But there are many behaviors which aren't "crimes" but which are morally repulsive. I don't agree with that concept. I don't think it's possible to legislate morality and the entire concept is downright scary. What's even more scary though is metering out justice based on perceived morality. Justice needs to be impartial, otherwise you're literally putting people in jail because your dislike them. > The danger of not reacting, one way or another, to such inequities is that people lose faith in the system. Already, the election of Trump and rise of fascist sentiments everywhere are like a giant "fuck you" to politics as usual. On the contrary, I see the election of Trump as a demonstration of people's faith in the system. It worked as intended and they got what they (electorally speaking) asked for. > It can get much worse. At some point, as one billionaire said, "the pitchforks are coming". I don't think we'll be able to avoid it the way things are going. I really doubt that. I've got significantly more faith in our shared humanity and the rule of law. I do find it disturbing how a lot of the politics on the left has shifted from policy disagreement to directly stoking violence. But it'll eventually pass. Unemployment and immigration policy is at a tipping point where the only choice for employers is going to be rising wages. The left is going to have a hard time arguing that's a bad thing.
- sokoloff 8y ago
  > The left is going to have a hard time arguing [rising wages are] a bad thing. Why would the left argue that rising wages is a bad thing anyway? It seems that a significant subset of the left has been beating the “we need higher minimum wages and more wage growth overall" drum for a while. Is it just because they strictly prefer a governmental rather than a natural market solution? Or something else?
  - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
    I believe that koolba's point was about rising wages in relation to immigration policy. That is, wages rise further if we let fewer immigrants in. But that's a problem for the left, which wants rising wages, but also wants a liberal immigration policy.

voodootrucker 8y ago

The crime was massive fraud by the credit rating agencies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_rating_agencies_and_the_subprime_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_rating_agencies_and_the...

umanwizard 8y ago
As I commented elsewhere credit rating agencies are not the same things as banks. Why should bank executives be prosecuted for something credit rating agencies did?

inthewoods 8y ago

Dick Fuld significantly misrepresented the actual financial health and leverage of Lehman on public financial documents. Pretty clear Sarbox infraction. Nothing happened to him.