5 ms·

Couldn’t agree more. Better spend resources on things that actually matter. Pros of a free global banking system heavily outweigh the cons of money-laundering.

Couldn’t agree more. Better spend resources on things that actually matter. Pros of a free global banking system heavily outweigh the cons of money-laundering. Plus, nowadays there’s no real barrier stopping banks/financial institutions to verify international clients (Mercury, TransferWise are good examples).

georgeecollins 6y ago
But the point is that sometimes it is easier to go after bankers than crooks. If the bankers know they are profiting off criminals why shouldn't they be responsible. It sounds great to say, why not just go after the criminals? The practical reason why not is that people who launder money create an incentive for crime. Every thief knows how much they are likely to get from a fence. As an ethical matter, why shouldn't we punish people who knowingly profit from people committing crimes-- often horrible crimes?
- kukabynd 6y ago
  I need to state that both methods are evil. One is just better for lots of normal people (my case). Punishing bankers sounds good but in reality all of the fines I’ve seen are nothing but slaps on the wrist. So if that’s the case, then it doesn’t work, no?
  - georgeecollins 6y ago
    I think it is bad that white collar crimes seem to only result in fines and that should be addressed. But if it only is fines that still makes the price of doing business higher. I really recommend reading "The Billion Dollar Whale" because it is a good book and shocking. It is about an individual who really just stole billions of dollars from the Malayan government and then tries to hide it. Every year his fund has a reputable auditor, but every year it is a new auditor, for example. Goldman Sachs facilitated the crime by making huge transfers with very little diligence. They asked for huge fees, not just relative to the amount, but on a percentage basis. Probably because they knew something was shady and they figured they would get sued. Also, they were aiding a crime but as you say, it all will be just a fine no charges. GS admitted guilt and is paying almost a $3b fine for this. And IMO they should.
    - kukabynd 5y ago
      Yeah these are good stories but $3b fine is not that big for an entiy like Goldman Sachs. Insiders make moves that make financial sense with these huge fines cause they profit a lot more, obviously.

georgeecollins 6y ago

But the point is that sometimes it is easier to go after bankers than crooks. If the bankers know they are profiting off criminals why shouldn't they be responsible. It sounds great to say, why not just go after the criminals? The practical reason why not is that people who launder money create an incentive for crime. Every thief knows how much they are likely to get from a fence. As an ethical matter, why shouldn't we punish people who knowingly profit from people committing crimes-- often horrible crimes?

kukabynd 6y ago
I need to state that both methods are evil. One is just better for lots of normal people (my case). Punishing bankers sounds good but in reality all of the fines I’ve seen are nothing but slaps on the wrist. So if that’s the case, then it doesn’t work, no?
- georgeecollins 6y ago
  I think it is bad that white collar crimes seem to only result in fines and that should be addressed. But if it only is fines that still makes the price of doing business higher. I really recommend reading "The Billion Dollar Whale" because it is a good book and shocking. It is about an individual who really just stole billions of dollars from the Malayan government and then tries to hide it. Every year his fund has a reputable auditor, but every year it is a new auditor, for example. Goldman Sachs facilitated the crime by making huge transfers with very little diligence. They asked for huge fees, not just relative to the amount, but on a percentage basis. Probably because they knew something was shady and they figured they would get sued. Also, they were aiding a crime but as you say, it all will be just a fine no charges. GS admitted guilt and is paying almost a $3b fine for this. And IMO they should.
  - kukabynd 5y ago
    Yeah these are good stories but $3b fine is not that big for an entiy like Goldman Sachs. Insiders make moves that make financial sense with these huge fines cause they profit a lot more, obviously.