4 ms·
Banks' business is to manage money not to turn money away... It's not unethical behaviour. It's simple business. No-one in any business is going to ask where t
by entity345 8y ago
Banks' business is to manage money not to turn money away...
It's not unethical behaviour. It's simple business. No-one in any business is going to ask where their customers got their money from, you just try to make customers spend their cash on you rather than a competitor.
Banks have to comply with the law, of course, but beyond that you cannot expect them to hurt their business for no reason. This "holier than thou" attitude is hypocrisy, frankly.
- Geeek 8y ago...and to comply with the law. The law that was created in response to their unethical behavior.
- keymone 8y agounfortunately for us, reasonable people, there is no such thing for banks (and businesses in general) as "unethical behavior" when it comes to money. their responsibility is to increase shareholders' (or clients') value. they must comply with the law and often they don't or they devise clever workarounds, abusing judicial loopholes, and sometimes they get caught and then sometimes some scape-goat might end up in jail for couple years. until we see a mass execution^W^W real punishment of top management of all of large banks on this planet - nothing will change in the foreseeable future.
- Geeek 8y ago>when it comes to money. their responsibility is to increase shareholders' (or clients') value. That is not an empirical fact. It's a specific interpretation of how things should be in the world. Some see it that way and other see it differently.
- keymone 8y agoIt’s an interpretation of how things are. And unfortunately “let’s ostracize those who don’t behave ethically” doesn’t seem to be a scary enough stick if you consider that those banks have far more business with individuals that acquired their wealth in illegal ways and give zero shits about ethics.
- jillesvangurp 8y agoWhite collar crime continues to be something that they can get away with. IMHO the solution is not more rules but simply applying existing laws less leniently. There are a lot of bank executives that are not nearly worried enough about going to jail.
- lixtra 8y agoSo banks operate a bit like open proxies on the internet (actually they are much more responsible). The administrators should go to jail then?
- james_s_tayler 8y agoIf you truly don't understand why there are anti money laundering laws I suggest you go commit some crimes for large financial gain and then figure out what the hell to do with the money such that you can use it.
- entity345 8y agoThat's the not the point of the thread you're replying to. Someone claimed that it was the bank's fault because they did nothing to prevent money laundering. Why would they if they are not forced to? When you run a business you do not turn customers away, especially they they want to give you plenty of cash... It's naive or hypocritical to claim otherwise.
- james_s_tayler 8y agoOk.
- ToFundorNot 8y agoI feel like you're missing the circular logic of your argument. The laws are crazy because banks will not self regulate. They openly allow illicit funds, so rules need to be applied to stem the source. None is blaming them for accepting funds from anyone that they come across, but there should be no confusion as to why the rules exist: because the banks will indiscriminately allow the transfer of funds from illegitimate sources. With that in mind, the rules are crazy, because the banks don't care.
- entity345 8y agoNothing circular in my argument. I feel you're wilfully ignoring what I wrote.
- unparagoned 8y agoNope. Please explain what point you are trying to make. None gets it