3 ms·
I suppose "the company be dissolved, its records thoroughly purged, and its ability to legally operate revoked" is a bit too much... though it shouldn't be.
by Andrex 6y ago
I suppose "the company be dissolved, its records thoroughly purged, and its ability to legally operate revoked" is a bit too much... though it shouldn't be.
- pmiller2 6y agoWhy is it a bit much? I think the "corporate death penalty" is appropriate when you fail to protect the financial history of 147 million people.
- redis_mlc 6y agoThat was done for one of the US accounting companies, Arthur Andersen, related to Enron financials. Noody, including the govt., was happy with the final result. So although it should be on the table, in reality, it probably won't come from the govt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Andersen
- pmiller2 6y agoHow could the result have been any different or better? I don't see where anyone's claiming the government was unhappy with the final result. Rotten firms like this need to die.
- Traster 6y agoThe thing is that when the reasonable solution is "Stop the company doing its core competency" you need to realise that almost everything else the company does is going to be "exploit whatever it has left". So forcibly shutting down the company is far more reasonable than just stopping it from collecting credit information.