3 ms·
Who said people were happy about it? I think there's a lot of anger at banks at the moment for perceived corruption. But there's a huge gap between voters carin
by dodo53 15y ago
Who said people were happy about it? I think there's a lot of anger at banks at the moment for perceived corruption. But there's a huge gap between voters caring and measures that are actually effective being put in place with lots of lobbying in between (and I have no idea what measures would be effective; and many people that do probably are also in a position to get a cushie job helping to avoid or lobby against those measures at a bank).
- tankenmate 15y agoPunitive damages on a geometric scale for repeat offences in a 10 year period? 3 times profit made plus any damages for first re-offence, 9 times for second re-offence. Sounds similar to training a child to go to sleep on their own...
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- dodo53 15y agoI'm guessing the devil is in the detail (and I don't know much so I'll shut up shortly) - could companies set up shell legal entities to offend for them / shop around for a better jurisdiction to do dodgy deals in / is current law clear enough that serious penalties wouldn't end up having a chilling effect on all business (OP was implying that the current status is that if the SEC wants to, they can probably find some law you're breaking). Serious penalties would probably demand a lot of legal boilerplate to make absolutely sure 'good business' wasn't effected and the government doesn't have power to destroy politically inconvenient companies without due process; the more boilerplate, the more likely the more expensive lawyers at the banks will outwit the lawyers writing the laws. Add some (possibly sponsored) political rhetoric about regulations killing jobs in a recession and I think it gets very hard to actually nail it down.