4 ms·

I've been of the mind that it should START with any profits. Then the fine. It was a crime after all. They should be required to disgorge any gains, and then b

by ixwt 4y ago

I've been of the mind that it should START with any profits. Then the fine. It was a crime after all. They should be required to disgorge any gains, and then be penalized. I worry how hard it would be to calculate these numbers though. Especially with creative accounting. That could be another part of the fine though: the cost of the forensic accountants to determine profits.

thereddaikon 4y ago
It should be both. The calculus needs to be reworked so that its never a more profitable move to break the law. That's why it keeps happening today after all, its just considered the cost of doing business. People should go to jail, the company should lose any gains it made from the action and there should be a fine on top. They should unequivocally be worse off because of it.
- Loughla 4y ago
  Honestly, I have yet to hear a good argument for why people who commit fraud and other white-collar crimes shouldn't serve jail sentences. I also believe that strict sentencing for white collar crime (like we do for literally everything else) might actually be a deterrent. I have heard the argument that being overly punitive will force businesses to be too conservative in their dealings for fear of accidentally breaking the law, but I just don't buy that.
  - thereddaikon 4y ago
    The reason, and I don't think its a good one, as I understand it has to do with the hacky way in which our legal system treats corporations. A corporation isn't its own class of entity. Its basically a a repurposed concept of a person. "Corporate personhood" is the term. They are and aren't people at the same time. They are because the law says so. They aren't because reality says so. You end up with weird consequences like how do you punish a corporation thats broken the law? Well you cant jail one really. So the only recourse most of the time are fines. People didn't break the law, the corp did. Which is also a person because we said so. What we need is a constitutional amendment that defines a corporation as a separate entity from people and sets the standards for who is criminally responsible for a corp. Personally I feel it should be some combination of the owners and the executives running it. Usually its the executives that are the cause for evil but the owners often incentivize them to do so.
hef19898 4y ago
Take revenue instead of profit and make it impossible to claim those fines as losses for tax purposes.

by ixwt 4y ago

thereddaikon 4y ago

It should be both. The calculus needs to be reworked so that its never a more profitable move to break the law. That's why it keeps happening today after all, its just considered the cost of doing business. People should go to jail, the company should lose any gains it made from the action and there should be a fine on top. They should unequivocally be worse off because of it.

Loughla 4y ago
Honestly, I have yet to hear a good argument for why people who commit fraud and other white-collar crimes shouldn't serve jail sentences. I also believe that strict sentencing for white collar crime (like we do for literally everything else) might actually be a deterrent. I have heard the argument that being overly punitive will force businesses to be too conservative in their dealings for fear of accidentally breaking the law, but I just don't buy that.
- thereddaikon 4y ago
  The reason, and I don't think its a good one, as I understand it has to do with the hacky way in which our legal system treats corporations. A corporation isn't its own class of entity. Its basically a a repurposed concept of a person. "Corporate personhood" is the term. They are and aren't people at the same time. They are because the law says so. They aren't because reality says so. You end up with weird consequences like how do you punish a corporation thats broken the law? Well you cant jail one really. So the only recourse most of the time are fines. People didn't break the law, the corp did. Which is also a person because we said so. What we need is a constitutional amendment that defines a corporation as a separate entity from people and sets the standards for who is criminally responsible for a corp. Personally I feel it should be some combination of the owners and the executives running it. Usually its the executives that are the cause for evil but the owners often incentivize them to do so.

hef19898 4y ago

Take revenue instead of profit and make it impossible to claim those fines as losses for tax purposes.