3 ms·

How can we reconcile this with still sending men to prison for 5 years for selling dime bags of weed on the corner? Seriously, who's the bigger criminal here?

How can we reconcile this with still sending men to prison for 5 years for selling dime bags of weed on the corner? Seriously, who's the bigger criminal here? I get it, companies aren't people, blah blah. But people make these decisions and those people should be punished.

SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
I tend to agree. But the criminals who opened the fake accounts were overworked low-level staffers with unrealistic sales quotas, so they're very sympathetic. I don't think I've seen anyone even suggest they should be prosecuted; the discussion has largely focused on their bosses and Wells Fargo as a company, who fired them when the fake accounts were discovered.
- HumblyTossed 7y ago
  > But the criminals who opened the fake accounts were overworked low-level staffers At who's direction? How does low-level staffer at WF#1167 know low-level staffer at WF#2826 2200 miles away? When would they share the information that this is how you up your numbers? Upper management had to know. They had to have encouraged this.
  - SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
    Even if that's true, and I think it's important to note there's no known evidence for it, being asked to commit a crime doesn't normally diminish your culpability for it. If your boss tells you to open a fake account, you're obligated to say no, just as you would if your boss told you to go punch someone or steal their wallet.
    - zentiggr 7y ago
      On the other hand, under the UCMJ generally subordinates that are forced into compliance with unlawful orders are not punished anywhere near as harshly as the superior officers that cause the situations. Not that any institution gets it right or is spotlessly incorruptible, but the general direction of UCMJ actions is the good of the service, not just being punitive.
      - SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
        That principle seems to have been followed here. The individual fraudsters were just fired, although some reports have indicated there’s a black mark on their record; the CEO was fired, paid 17 million dollars, and is banned from ever working for a bank in the future. (And he’s not even accused of having ordered the fraud, just of not doing enough to stop it.)
        zentiggr 7y ago
        I think you left off your sarcasm tag. Getting > 0 dollars as a consequence of encouraging and abetting multiple scandals worth of malpractice is NOT what I meant. While rank and file employees who complied were and should have been fired, his punishment should have been far more severe, at least forfeiting every dollar of compensation and realistically serving time for fraud.
- FpUser 7y ago
  That is because there is no JUSTICE system. The system we have is not designed to make things right. It is designed to satisfy some things the governments and reaches like to be
Nasrudith 7y ago
It is a stupid human trick - people tend to hold those in power to a lesser standard than those without even when they lack any conflicts of interest. Whether cultural or genetic there is a clear dynamic linked to history of might makes right - regardless of direction of causation. Another factor is the failure point of adversarial systems. While having a prechosen defender would be equal the incentives are insanely exploitable. The rich or powerful (being a pillar of the community is a form of power among others) have stronger defenses to force the dotting of every i and crossing of every t even before any corruption. Combinr that with organizational dynamics that are about diluting and confusing responsibility for self protection - whether it is businesses, church, government, mob, or organized crime.

SpicyLemonZest 7y ago

I tend to agree. But the criminals who opened the fake accounts were overworked low-level staffers with unrealistic sales quotas, so they're very sympathetic. I don't think I've seen anyone even suggest they should be prosecuted; the discussion has largely focused on their bosses and Wells Fargo as a company, who fired them when the fake accounts were discovered.

HumblyTossed 7y ago
> But the criminals who opened the fake accounts were overworked low-level staffers At who's direction? How does low-level staffer at WF#1167 know low-level staffer at WF#2826 2200 miles away? When would they share the information that this is how you up your numbers? Upper management had to know. They had to have encouraged this.
- SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
  Even if that's true, and I think it's important to note there's no known evidence for it, being asked to commit a crime doesn't normally diminish your culpability for it. If your boss tells you to open a fake account, you're obligated to say no, just as you would if your boss told you to go punch someone or steal their wallet.
  - zentiggr 7y ago
    On the other hand, under the UCMJ generally subordinates that are forced into compliance with unlawful orders are not punished anywhere near as harshly as the superior officers that cause the situations. Not that any institution gets it right or is spotlessly incorruptible, but the general direction of UCMJ actions is the good of the service, not just being punitive.
    - SpicyLemonZest 7y ago
      That principle seems to have been followed here. The individual fraudsters were just fired, although some reports have indicated there’s a black mark on their record; the CEO was fired, paid 17 million dollars, and is banned from ever working for a bank in the future. (And he’s not even accused of having ordered the fraud, just of not doing enough to stop it.)
      - zentiggr 7y ago
        I think you left off your sarcasm tag. Getting > 0 dollars as a consequence of encouraging and abetting multiple scandals worth of malpractice is NOT what I meant. While rank and file employees who complied were and should have been fired, his punishment should have been far more severe, at least forfeiting every dollar of compensation and realistically serving time for fraud.
FpUser 7y ago
That is because there is no JUSTICE system. The system we have is not designed to make things right. It is designed to satisfy some things the governments and reaches like to be

Nasrudith 7y ago

It is a stupid human trick - people tend to hold those in power to a lesser standard than those without even when they lack any conflicts of interest. Whether cultural or genetic there is a clear dynamic linked to history of might makes right - regardless of direction of causation. Another factor is the failure point of adversarial systems. While having a prechosen defender would be equal the incentives are insanely exploitable. The rich or powerful (being a pillar of the community is a form of power among others) have stronger defenses to force the dotting of every i and crossing of every t even before any corruption. Combinr that with organizational dynamics that are about diluting and confusing responsibility for self protection - whether it is businesses, church, government, mob, or organized crime.