3 ms·

Boeing: - Responsible for 2 plane crashes that killed 346 people - Engaged in a government cover-up and was charged with criminal fraud conspiracy - Fired CE

Boeing: - Responsible for 2 plane crashes that killed 346 people - Engaged in a government cover-up and was charged with criminal fraud conspiracy - Fired CEO left with $81 million exit package - No one went to jail *Fined $2.5 billion - 2% of annual revenue

throwaway122378 6y ago
But open your restaurant and get locked up!
gameswithgo 6y ago
I feel like something the American Left and the American Right could agree on is that white collar criminals should face the same kind of tough law enforcement consequences as regular street criminals. How would one start pushing for such legislation?
- jacksnipe 6y ago
  I'm pretty sure that they don't actually agree on that.
  - NOGDP 6y ago
    If you ask an average American from either side they will probably agree that white collar criminals should face tougher consequences. If you ask an average politician from either side, they will probably agree on the opposite.
    - drewblaisdell 6y ago
      This is the nature of our "democracy".
    - tartoran 6y ago
      Or won't agree on the definition of white collar crime and if push comes to shove to implement a low they'll likely leave some loopholes, maybe not intentionally, maybe so and the big corporate criminals will find ways to come unscathed
- dietsprite 6y ago
  Feel like left or right, most elected US officials are corporatists and not willing to bite (or even upset) the hand that feeds them. That said, the right is decidedly not in favor of stronger enforcement/regulation. White-collar enforcement is at an all time low: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-10/trump-oversees-all-time-low-in-white-collar-crime-enforcement https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-10/trump-ove...
  - treeman79 6y ago
    Ideal scenario for free market capitalist. Low regulations AND low government involvement. So lots of people can build widgets. Companies that do a bad job find they have no customers. New companies pop up, do a better job and things get cheaper and or better. High regulations means that new companies need massive capital to enter the market. So much so that no one bothers. When only 1 company builds a widget. Well odds are it’s going to be low quality and expensive. Now this all has to balanced that you don’t massive unsafe planes flying around by companies that have no reputation to preserve. Whoops, we took out the Golden Gate Bridge, again. We will go out of business and company mark 3 will try again
    - abraae 6y ago
      747s != Widgets. Huge natural barriers to competition.
  - colordrops 6y ago
    > most elected US officials are corporatists and not willing to bite (or even upset) the hand that feeds them This seems like a clear fact, and yet many will call you a conspiracy theorist for pointing out the obvious. It's probably a symptom of the tribalist aspect of red vs blue. People need to be de-programmed of the team sports to finally realize that their "side" is beholden to corporations and not the people. Only then will we see real action to criminalize white collar behavior.
- Someone1234 6y ago
  Politicians are unlikely to because they can better relate to white collar criminals than the poor. The only solution to this is electing more people from diverse backgrounds (inc. class, race, gender, etc), but unfortunately money is extremely effective at winning democratic elections, and those who have it aren't from a diverse background.
  - hinkley 6y ago
    As someone recently described it to me: lawmakers vote for punishments they can't envision themselves ever receiving.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    >Politicians are unlikely to because they can better relate to white collar criminals than the poor. It also has something to do with plausible deniability and inability to prove intent with white collar crimes. How would you be able to prove someone intentionally mis-valued assets? Cut costs specifically to bolster one's own income and not benefit the other shareholders? Hired someone in exchange for a favor or possible future favor? Fired someone for stepping out of line? Plausible deniability is also the reason for "productive" in person lunch meetings and golf outings. Not that there aren't other positive aspects of in person conversations, but lack of a permanent record is one of its aspects, and can easily be used to cause harm.
- jb_s 6y ago
  Too distracted fighting the other, "wrong" half of the working class :-) Meanwhile the country is literally controlled by the companies in question.
- freerobby 6y ago
  > How would one start pushing for such legislation? Lessen the punishment of street criminals.
  - tartoran 6y ago
    And what would that solve? White collar crime won't be affected at all
    - recursive 6y ago
      That would solve the problem of punishment disparity between street- and white-collar- crime.
      - tartoran 6y ago
        I care more for a disparity between criminals and non criminals to be honest. White collar criminals dilapidate enormous amounts of money but street criminals could directly be violent towards whom they rob. (and being robbed, asides from the financial loss, it often leaves some psychological scars). I see your point and it's hard to imagine that a person stealing say, some food, because they're starving may do time in prison and yet the author of a multimillion shenanigan goes scot-free, yes that's not fair at all, but lowering the punishment for street crime will make us average people even more miserable. The only rational thing to do is start punishing white crime seriously so it is a huge deterrent. Currently white criminals who get convicted stay in prisons whose conditions are better than the situation of a lot of struggling full time working Americans. I find that appalling
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    As long as we still punish them enough to make engaging in petty "crime with a victim" not worth it. None of this SF bull-crap where we basically don't punish the bike thieves, shoplifters and porch pirates but still find people hundreds of dollars for doing donuts in empty parking lots or not obtaining a permit before building a deck on their own house. I'm fine with not doing squat to deter victimless crime but we can't allow the punishments for crime with a victim to be so low that it's more lucrative than a real job even after being caught many times.
- rootusrootus 6y ago
  For most people, white collar crime is relatively abstract. Something to be outraged about when you hear it on the news, but not something that you can feel affecting you personally. Blue collar crime, especially the kind that occurs at a personal level, is more visceral. People really want to see those people kept away from them, more than they want to see rehabilitation. Whether rehabilitation would lead to better long-term outcomes gets ignored. The Boeing situation is a little different, of course, since it really did kill a bunch of people.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    >since it really did kill a bunch of people. No one can prove a specific Boeing executive's actions caused people to die. There would have to be an email from the executive stating "I think we should cut costs here and here and I acknowledge this may cause x% of passengers to die". And they're not going to put something like this in an email either: "Meet with the guy that used to work for us who now works at the FAA and get him to waive or lower so and so standards so this plane can fly and we'll owe him".
    - rootusrootus 6y ago
      Perhaps one of the risks that executives at a high level (i.e. named corporate officers) have to bear in return for their absurd salaries is criminal liability when the corporation commits a crime. This might help align the incentives.
- frequentnapper 6y ago
  By taking away presidential pardons.
bishnu 6y ago
So, $7.2M per life lost.
- diob 6y ago
  Those dead people are gonna be living it up on that!
- d33 6y ago
  I guess I could bear this point if there was a commitment to dedicate this money to something that can actually save orders of magnitude more lives - though even then it's highly debatable. Thing is, is there at least such a promise?
- jws 6y ago
  For what it's worth, this is right in the middle of the "Value of Statistical Life" used in public policy decisions, $4M to $10M. https://strata.org/pdf/2017/vsl-full-report.pdf https://strata.org/pdf/2017/vsl-full-report.pdf At least one of the states has a statutory value of a life, but I'm afraid I can't find it now (don't Google it, you will be fed into the intake funnel for wrongful death lawyers), but I think it is around $7M. That said, $500M is for a victims' fund, about $1.4M/death, the rest appears to be a deterrent to deceiving regulators
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
CivBase 6y ago
For better context, Boeing's annual profits appear to typically be closer to $10B to $20B[0] - with 2019 and 2020 being anomalies for obvious reasons. $2.5B and no jail time still seems laughable in that context. [0] https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/BA/boeing/gross-profit https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/BA/boeing/gross-pr...

throwaway122378 6y ago

But open your restaurant and get locked up!

gameswithgo 6y ago

I feel like something the American Left and the American Right could agree on is that white collar criminals should face the same kind of tough law enforcement consequences as regular street criminals. How would one start pushing for such legislation?

jacksnipe 6y ago
I'm pretty sure that they don't actually agree on that.
- NOGDP 6y ago
  If you ask an average American from either side they will probably agree that white collar criminals should face tougher consequences. If you ask an average politician from either side, they will probably agree on the opposite.
  - drewblaisdell 6y ago
    This is the nature of our "democracy".
  - tartoran 6y ago
    Or won't agree on the definition of white collar crime and if push comes to shove to implement a low they'll likely leave some loopholes, maybe not intentionally, maybe so and the big corporate criminals will find ways to come unscathed
dietsprite 6y ago
Feel like left or right, most elected US officials are corporatists and not willing to bite (or even upset) the hand that feeds them. That said, the right is decidedly not in favor of stronger enforcement/regulation. White-collar enforcement is at an all time low: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-10/trump-oversees-all-time-low-in-white-collar-crime-enforcement https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-10/trump-ove...
- treeman79 6y ago
  Ideal scenario for free market capitalist. Low regulations AND low government involvement. So lots of people can build widgets. Companies that do a bad job find they have no customers. New companies pop up, do a better job and things get cheaper and or better. High regulations means that new companies need massive capital to enter the market. So much so that no one bothers. When only 1 company builds a widget. Well odds are it’s going to be low quality and expensive. Now this all has to balanced that you don’t massive unsafe planes flying around by companies that have no reputation to preserve. Whoops, we took out the Golden Gate Bridge, again. We will go out of business and company mark 3 will try again
  - abraae 6y ago
    747s != Widgets. Huge natural barriers to competition.
- colordrops 6y ago
  > most elected US officials are corporatists and not willing to bite (or even upset) the hand that feeds them This seems like a clear fact, and yet many will call you a conspiracy theorist for pointing out the obvious. It's probably a symptom of the tribalist aspect of red vs blue. People need to be de-programmed of the team sports to finally realize that their "side" is beholden to corporations and not the people. Only then will we see real action to criminalize white collar behavior.
Someone1234 6y ago
Politicians are unlikely to because they can better relate to white collar criminals than the poor. The only solution to this is electing more people from diverse backgrounds (inc. class, race, gender, etc), but unfortunately money is extremely effective at winning democratic elections, and those who have it aren't from a diverse background.
- hinkley 6y ago
  As someone recently described it to me: lawmakers vote for punishments they can't envision themselves ever receiving.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  >Politicians are unlikely to because they can better relate to white collar criminals than the poor. It also has something to do with plausible deniability and inability to prove intent with white collar crimes. How would you be able to prove someone intentionally mis-valued assets? Cut costs specifically to bolster one's own income and not benefit the other shareholders? Hired someone in exchange for a favor or possible future favor? Fired someone for stepping out of line? Plausible deniability is also the reason for "productive" in person lunch meetings and golf outings. Not that there aren't other positive aspects of in person conversations, but lack of a permanent record is one of its aspects, and can easily be used to cause harm.
jb_s 6y ago
Too distracted fighting the other, "wrong" half of the working class :-) Meanwhile the country is literally controlled by the companies in question.
freerobby 6y ago
> How would one start pushing for such legislation? Lessen the punishment of street criminals.
- tartoran 6y ago
  And what would that solve? White collar crime won't be affected at all
  - recursive 6y ago
    That would solve the problem of punishment disparity between street- and white-collar- crime.
    - tartoran 6y ago
      I care more for a disparity between criminals and non criminals to be honest. White collar criminals dilapidate enormous amounts of money but street criminals could directly be violent towards whom they rob. (and being robbed, asides from the financial loss, it often leaves some psychological scars). I see your point and it's hard to imagine that a person stealing say, some food, because they're starving may do time in prison and yet the author of a multimillion shenanigan goes scot-free, yes that's not fair at all, but lowering the punishment for street crime will make us average people even more miserable. The only rational thing to do is start punishing white crime seriously so it is a huge deterrent. Currently white criminals who get convicted stay in prisons whose conditions are better than the situation of a lot of struggling full time working Americans. I find that appalling
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  As long as we still punish them enough to make engaging in petty "crime with a victim" not worth it. None of this SF bull-crap where we basically don't punish the bike thieves, shoplifters and porch pirates but still find people hundreds of dollars for doing donuts in empty parking lots or not obtaining a permit before building a deck on their own house. I'm fine with not doing squat to deter victimless crime but we can't allow the punishments for crime with a victim to be so low that it's more lucrative than a real job even after being caught many times.
rootusrootus 6y ago
For most people, white collar crime is relatively abstract. Something to be outraged about when you hear it on the news, but not something that you can feel affecting you personally. Blue collar crime, especially the kind that occurs at a personal level, is more visceral. People really want to see those people kept away from them, more than they want to see rehabilitation. Whether rehabilitation would lead to better long-term outcomes gets ignored. The Boeing situation is a little different, of course, since it really did kill a bunch of people.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  >since it really did kill a bunch of people. No one can prove a specific Boeing executive's actions caused people to die. There would have to be an email from the executive stating "I think we should cut costs here and here and I acknowledge this may cause x% of passengers to die". And they're not going to put something like this in an email either: "Meet with the guy that used to work for us who now works at the FAA and get him to waive or lower so and so standards so this plane can fly and we'll owe him".
  - rootusrootus 6y ago
    Perhaps one of the risks that executives at a high level (i.e. named corporate officers) have to bear in return for their absurd salaries is criminal liability when the corporation commits a crime. This might help align the incentives.
frequentnapper 6y ago
By taking away presidential pardons.

bishnu 6y ago

So, $7.2M per life lost.

diob 6y ago
Those dead people are gonna be living it up on that!
d33 6y ago
I guess I could bear this point if there was a commitment to dedicate this money to something that can actually save orders of magnitude more lives - though even then it's highly debatable. Thing is, is there at least such a promise?
jws 6y ago
For what it's worth, this is right in the middle of the "Value of Statistical Life" used in public policy decisions, $4M to $10M. https://strata.org/pdf/2017/vsl-full-report.pdf https://strata.org/pdf/2017/vsl-full-report.pdf At least one of the states has a statutory value of a life, but I'm afraid I can't find it now (don't Google it, you will be fed into the intake funnel for wrongful death lawyers), but I think it is around $7M. That said, $500M is for a victims' fund, about $1.4M/death, the rest appears to be a deterrent to deceiving regulators

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

CivBase 6y ago

For better context, Boeing's annual profits appear to typically be closer to $10B to $20B[0] - with 2019 and 2020 being anomalies for obvious reasons. $2.5B and no jail time still seems laughable in that context. [0] https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/BA/boeing/gross-profit https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/BA/boeing/gross-pr...