10 ms·

Serious question: Why is everyones reaction to put {executive} in jail? People don't understand that corporations, and to a larger extent, governments, are Med

by cremp 8y ago

Serious question: Why is everyones reaction to put {executive} in jail? People don't understand that corporations, and to a larger extent, governments, are Medusa. You can cut a snake off, but there are more, who were trained by {executive}. (And it doesn't actually stop the {bad_practice} from happening; the head wasn't cut off.) (And for those who really want the myth, the head still turned people to stone, IE 'we've always done it this way.') Don't get me wrong; as a net-isizen, I want Pai to rot in hell for everything he's done, but what is the rational behind putting people in jail? USA already has enough people incarcerated from tiny drug charges; what makes this any better? Throwing people in jail won't solve anything, so why is that the biggest reaction to stuff like this?

imgabe 8y ago
What is your proposal to stop this behavior then? Putting people in jail for doing bad things is a signal to future people who want to do those bad things that they will suffer consequences for it. This will make them rethink doing those things. AKA "deterrence" If people can do these things and get away with it, why wouldn't they? They make billions of dollars doing this and have no chance of suffering any negative consequences. If you were in a room with a billion dollars on the table and you knew you'd be free to take it and no one would ever come after you for it, wouldn't you take it? > You can cut a snake off, but there are more, who were trained by {executive} If your boss told you to do a bunch of things, and then got thrown in jail for doing exactly those things, are you saying that you would keep on doing them? Most people wouldn't.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- ikeboy 8y ago
  What, exactly, are the "bad things" you want people to go to jail for?
  - imgabe 8y ago
    In this case, manipulating government regulations by submitting false comments. If it's proved that companies fraudulently submitted comments to create the appearance of a grassroots sentiment that did not exist, specifically in order to obtain favorable regulations that would enrich them, don't you think that someone should go to jail for that?
    - ikeboy 8y ago
      Are there any credible allegations that Ajit Pai, or any other government employees were behind any false comments? Because I haven't seen any such claims. It seems to me that people are demanding he be put in jail for drafting and voting for a regulation they disagree with.
      - imgabe 8y ago
        I honestly don't know what role, if any, Pai specifically may have had. This is why we have a justice system - to investigate crimes and hold trials to determine if someone committed a crime or not. I agree he should not be put in jail solely on the basis of allegations from the Internet. I don't think anyone is proposing that.
        ikeboy 8y ago
        The original comment here says "Why is Ajit Pai not in jail?"
        imgabe 8y ago
        I assume that person believes that, as former general counsel of a major telecom company and then head of the FCC, if there were wrongdoing, Pai would have been aware of it, if not involved. Do you think that's an unreasonable assumption? Even if it happened without his knowledge, he's the leader so it's ultimately his responsibility. In the best case, we could say he was negligent in assessing the validity of the comments that were submitted to his agency. After all, subsequent investigations have been able to determine the comments were fraudulent, so why didn't he? If he knew they were fake and just ignored that fact because they supported what he wanted to do anyway, that's another thing. If he was being compensated in some backdoor way from the industry for ignoring that the comments were fake, that's yet another thing. These are things that should be investigated.
- jachee 8y ago
  > What is your proposal to stop this behavior then? In the 18th century, they used the Guillotine.
  - padseeker 8y ago
    So we're advocating for the death penalty for fake comments? Doesn't that sound a little excessive for fake comments on the internets?
    - imgabe 8y ago
      It's not merely fake comments. It's fake comments used by a small group of people to enrich themselves at the expense of everyone else. I'm sure the reference to the death penalty is being hyperbolic, but this is a little different from some kid pretending to be a Navy Seal to sound like a tough guy.
    - craftinator 8y ago
      I'm advocating for execution. He took on a position of power and responsibility. He abused that power to line his pockets while disregarding the responsibility to the American people. Maybe we should set up a comment system to decide his fate! And we can make it just as insecure as the one he chose for us.
      - dang 8y ago
        Could you please stop posting unsubstantive and/or flamebaity comments to Hacker News? It's not what this site is for, and we ban accounts that do that repeatedly. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - jachee 8y ago
      Read up on the French Revolution and what actually happened. You'll learn who did what to whom and within what legal framework (or lack thereof). You may also start to see some parallels.
java-man 8y ago
Please define {executive}. A business executive is different from a government official. How do we ensure that an unelected government official does not (continue) to engage in nefarious activity?
rm_-rf_slash 8y ago
We used to throw white collar criminals in jail all the time. Over a thousand bankers were convicted and many jailed during the Savings and Loan crisis of the late 80s. Their harm to the financial system did far more to damage society than weed dealers. America just doesn’t prosecute and jail white collar criminals anymore, which is why it may seem odd to you that people call for jailing white collar criminals. For every Martin Shkreli that actually gets prison time, far too many wealthy and powerful people get away with doing great harm to society; if it doesn’t involve blood or drugs, they go home to their families.
jchw 8y ago
The whole point of putting people to jail is to discourage behavior. This is exactly what it's for. May very well be that there's someone in line waiting to be the next Ajit Pai, but what are they gonna do if they just watched five other people go to jail for what they might've tried to do?
PhasmaFelis 8y ago
The corporation as an entity may not care that an executive got thrown in prison, but the guy who replaced him will think twice before making the same decisions his predecessor did.
akira2501 8y ago
> Why is everyones reaction to put {executive} in jail? Because the current set of disincentives to act in this way are not adequate, and we further recognize that this is not a new problem. > but what is the rational behind putting people in jail? I think the hope is that these people will see the oversized punishment and avoid taking jobs in government service that seem to be taken exclusively to benefit their own agendas rather than to perform any public service. > what makes this any better? It actually stands a chance of modifying the behavior of the target group. It's a disincentive that they almost certainly don't want to face, as opposed to drug addicts who see it as a temporary inconvenience to their _addiction_. Are you suggesting that these executives are suffering from an addiction issue? > so why is that the biggest reaction to stuff like this? Because we've been watching this happen over and over again for years and we're sick of it being an issue. It's an over-reaction to be sure, but it's well justified given our history of failures here.
adrr 8y ago
During the savings and loans scandal, we convicted over a thousand people. Even if they committed the most minor infraction. I'd argue it cleaned up the banking industry for 20 years. Jail and a felony conviction which permanently destroys your career is a big motivator. Fines and not admitting wrong doing is as much risk as gambling in Vegas with a lot better odds.
craftinator 8y ago
Well, to be perfectly honest, I've held to the idea since all of this happened that he should be executed as a traitor for deceiving the American people and forcing legislation on us against our wishes. There's no way in hell that this was accidental, once you start thinking about how it all happened... So yeah, no jail for him, that's my vote!
yawaramin 8y ago
> corporations, and to a larger extent, governments, are Medusa. You mean Hydra. Medusa would turn anyone who looked at her to stone, Hydra would grow two heads to replace any one that was cut off.
reissbaker 8y ago
This is silly. When Nixon was impeached, future Presidents didn't keep bugging their political opponents' hotel rooms in some Medusa-like fashion. When J. Edgar Hoover died, the Senate put in mandatory term limits on FBI directors, they didn't just appoint more jedgars. When Napolean was exiled, his revolution died... And when he escaped exile, it returned in full force. We aren't helpless to sanction the powerful and thereby change policies and practices. Sure, sometimes you need a few shots at it — sometimes it really is a machine — but changing the head does in fact change the organization. If you want a closer-to-home example, just look at Uber under Dara vs Uber under Travis.
strictnein 8y ago
> "Don't get me wrong; as a net-isizen, I want Pai to rot in hell for everything he's done" Settle down. The hatred towards him is unbelievably off the charts.
inetknght 8y ago
> Why is everyones reaction to put {executive} in jail? Perhaps because if it were normal civilians they would be put in jail? Why should an executive be exempt from laws?

by cremp 8y ago

imgabe 8y ago

What is your proposal to stop this behavior then? Putting people in jail for doing bad things is a signal to future people who want to do those bad things that they will suffer consequences for it. This will make them rethink doing those things. AKA "deterrence" If people can do these things and get away with it, why wouldn't they? They make billions of dollars doing this and have no chance of suffering any negative consequences. If you were in a room with a billion dollars on the table and you knew you'd be free to take it and no one would ever come after you for it, wouldn't you take it? > You can cut a snake off, but there are more, who were trained by {executive} If your boss told you to do a bunch of things, and then got thrown in jail for doing exactly those things, are you saying that you would keep on doing them? Most people wouldn't.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
ikeboy 8y ago
What, exactly, are the "bad things" you want people to go to jail for?
- imgabe 8y ago
  In this case, manipulating government regulations by submitting false comments. If it's proved that companies fraudulently submitted comments to create the appearance of a grassroots sentiment that did not exist, specifically in order to obtain favorable regulations that would enrich them, don't you think that someone should go to jail for that?
  - ikeboy 8y ago
    Are there any credible allegations that Ajit Pai, or any other government employees were behind any false comments? Because I haven't seen any such claims. It seems to me that people are demanding he be put in jail for drafting and voting for a regulation they disagree with.
    - imgabe 8y ago
      I honestly don't know what role, if any, Pai specifically may have had. This is why we have a justice system - to investigate crimes and hold trials to determine if someone committed a crime or not. I agree he should not be put in jail solely on the basis of allegations from the Internet. I don't think anyone is proposing that.
      - ikeboy 8y ago
        The original comment here says "Why is Ajit Pai not in jail?"
        imgabe 8y ago
        I assume that person believes that, as former general counsel of a major telecom company and then head of the FCC, if there were wrongdoing, Pai would have been aware of it, if not involved. Do you think that's an unreasonable assumption? Even if it happened without his knowledge, he's the leader so it's ultimately his responsibility. In the best case, we could say he was negligent in assessing the validity of the comments that were submitted to his agency. After all, subsequent investigations have been able to determine the comments were fraudulent, so why didn't he? If he knew they were fake and just ignored that fact because they supported what he wanted to do anyway, that's another thing. If he was being compensated in some backdoor way from the industry for ignoring that the comments were fake, that's yet another thing. These are things that should be investigated.
jachee 8y ago
> What is your proposal to stop this behavior then? In the 18th century, they used the Guillotine.
- padseeker 8y ago
  So we're advocating for the death penalty for fake comments? Doesn't that sound a little excessive for fake comments on the internets?
  - imgabe 8y ago
    It's not merely fake comments. It's fake comments used by a small group of people to enrich themselves at the expense of everyone else. I'm sure the reference to the death penalty is being hyperbolic, but this is a little different from some kid pretending to be a Navy Seal to sound like a tough guy.
  - craftinator 8y ago
    I'm advocating for execution. He took on a position of power and responsibility. He abused that power to line his pockets while disregarding the responsibility to the American people. Maybe we should set up a comment system to decide his fate! And we can make it just as insecure as the one he chose for us.
    - dang 8y ago
      Could you please stop posting unsubstantive and/or flamebaity comments to Hacker News? It's not what this site is for, and we ban accounts that do that repeatedly. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - jachee 8y ago
    Read up on the French Revolution and what actually happened. You'll learn who did what to whom and within what legal framework (or lack thereof). You may also start to see some parallels.

java-man 8y ago

Please define {executive}. A business executive is different from a government official. How do we ensure that an unelected government official does not (continue) to engage in nefarious activity?

rm_-rf_slash 8y ago

We used to throw white collar criminals in jail all the time. Over a thousand bankers were convicted and many jailed during the Savings and Loan crisis of the late 80s. Their harm to the financial system did far more to damage society than weed dealers. America just doesn’t prosecute and jail white collar criminals anymore, which is why it may seem odd to you that people call for jailing white collar criminals. For every Martin Shkreli that actually gets prison time, far too many wealthy and powerful people get away with doing great harm to society; if it doesn’t involve blood or drugs, they go home to their families.

jchw 8y ago

The whole point of putting people to jail is to discourage behavior. This is exactly what it's for. May very well be that there's someone in line waiting to be the next Ajit Pai, but what are they gonna do if they just watched five other people go to jail for what they might've tried to do?

PhasmaFelis 8y ago

The corporation as an entity may not care that an executive got thrown in prison, but the guy who replaced him will think twice before making the same decisions his predecessor did.

akira2501 8y ago

> Why is everyones reaction to put {executive} in jail? Because the current set of disincentives to act in this way are not adequate, and we further recognize that this is not a new problem. > but what is the rational behind putting people in jail? I think the hope is that these people will see the oversized punishment and avoid taking jobs in government service that seem to be taken exclusively to benefit their own agendas rather than to perform any public service. > what makes this any better? It actually stands a chance of modifying the behavior of the target group. It's a disincentive that they almost certainly don't want to face, as opposed to drug addicts who see it as a temporary inconvenience to their _addiction_. Are you suggesting that these executives are suffering from an addiction issue? > so why is that the biggest reaction to stuff like this? Because we've been watching this happen over and over again for years and we're sick of it being an issue. It's an over-reaction to be sure, but it's well justified given our history of failures here.

adrr 8y ago

During the savings and loans scandal, we convicted over a thousand people. Even if they committed the most minor infraction. I'd argue it cleaned up the banking industry for 20 years. Jail and a felony conviction which permanently destroys your career is a big motivator. Fines and not admitting wrong doing is as much risk as gambling in Vegas with a lot better odds.

craftinator 8y ago

Well, to be perfectly honest, I've held to the idea since all of this happened that he should be executed as a traitor for deceiving the American people and forcing legislation on us against our wishes. There's no way in hell that this was accidental, once you start thinking about how it all happened... So yeah, no jail for him, that's my vote!

yawaramin 8y ago

> corporations, and to a larger extent, governments, are Medusa. You mean Hydra. Medusa would turn anyone who looked at her to stone, Hydra would grow two heads to replace any one that was cut off.

reissbaker 8y ago

This is silly. When Nixon was impeached, future Presidents didn't keep bugging their political opponents' hotel rooms in some Medusa-like fashion. When J. Edgar Hoover died, the Senate put in mandatory term limits on FBI directors, they didn't just appoint more jedgars. When Napolean was exiled, his revolution died... And when he escaped exile, it returned in full force. We aren't helpless to sanction the powerful and thereby change policies and practices. Sure, sometimes you need a few shots at it — sometimes it really is a machine — but changing the head does in fact change the organization. If you want a closer-to-home example, just look at Uber under Dara vs Uber under Travis.

strictnein 8y ago

> "Don't get me wrong; as a net-isizen, I want Pai to rot in hell for everything he's done" Settle down. The hatred towards him is unbelievably off the charts.

inetknght 8y ago

> Why is everyones reaction to put {executive} in jail? Perhaps because if it were normal civilians they would be put in jail? Why should an executive be exempt from laws?