3 ms·

> This is a hyperbole. Courts can split up companies, they can remove leaderships, they can confiscate the stocks, heck, if you are so worried about the workers

> This is a hyperbole. Courts can split up companies, they can remove leaderships, they can confiscate the stocks, heck, if you are so worried about the workers, perhaps you should ask your legislator to introduce a law where a malicious company can be ordered to reorganize as a coop and given to the workers. I’m confused how you can accuse me of hyperbole for stating that putting thousands of workers out of work is bad while it was you that suggesting disbanding the company for big enough crimes. Splitting up a company isn’t really a punishment. Probably good for competition though. Taking away stock is just a fine. Reorganizing as a coop is just kind of dumb. > A company paying a portion of their annual profit over two decades for knowingly risking cancer onto their customers probably fails every single of these groups. How about 2,000x the annual revenue generated from the activity?

runarberg 4y ago
> How about 2,000x the annual revenue generated from the activity? No. Companies should not be allowed to do crime, and the punishment should be proportional to the harm they caused, not to the revenue hypothesized by the scheme. A crime syndicate does not have to pay 2000 times the amount they would have gained by smuggling drugs, no their mules go to jail, their CEO is hunted down by the military, and their whole organization is disbanded. Nobody cares about the workers in this instance (I wonder why). > Reorganizing as a coop is just kind of dumb. Yeah, Well, You know, that’s just like, your opinion, man.
- fauxpause_ 4y ago
  > No. Companies should not be allowed to do crime, and the punishment should be proportional to the harm they caused, not to the revenue hypothesized by the scheme. It is proportional to the harm. And it is a massive multiplier over the amount earned by the scheme. If JJ only did Talc, they would be dead many hundreds of times over. But Talc is a tiny sliver of what they do. So they happen to be large enough to survive a massive blow from their talc operations. Think about what you’re saying. It does not make any sense. You seem to be upset mostly that JJ still exists. Which is only true because they are large and diverse in many products that are completely unrelated to the line of business that caused the problem. > A crime syndicate does not have to pay 2000 times the amount they would have gained by smuggling drugs, no their mules go to jail, their CEO is hunted down by the military, and their whole organization is disbanded. Nobody cares about the workers in this instance (I wonder why). Because those workers are criminals, not office workers and factory workers, the vast majority of whom are ordinary Americans doing normal, productive, legal jobs that are unrelated to the fact that talc had asbestos.

runarberg 4y ago

> How about 2,000x the annual revenue generated from the activity? No. Companies should not be allowed to do crime, and the punishment should be proportional to the harm they caused, not to the revenue hypothesized by the scheme. A crime syndicate does not have to pay 2000 times the amount they would have gained by smuggling drugs, no their mules go to jail, their CEO is hunted down by the military, and their whole organization is disbanded. Nobody cares about the workers in this instance (I wonder why). > Reorganizing as a coop is just kind of dumb. Yeah, Well, You know, that’s just like, your opinion, man.

fauxpause_ 4y ago
> No. Companies should not be allowed to do crime, and the punishment should be proportional to the harm they caused, not to the revenue hypothesized by the scheme. It is proportional to the harm. And it is a massive multiplier over the amount earned by the scheme. If JJ only did Talc, they would be dead many hundreds of times over. But Talc is a tiny sliver of what they do. So they happen to be large enough to survive a massive blow from their talc operations. Think about what you’re saying. It does not make any sense. You seem to be upset mostly that JJ still exists. Which is only true because they are large and diverse in many products that are completely unrelated to the line of business that caused the problem. > A crime syndicate does not have to pay 2000 times the amount they would have gained by smuggling drugs, no their mules go to jail, their CEO is hunted down by the military, and their whole organization is disbanded. Nobody cares about the workers in this instance (I wonder why). Because those workers are criminals, not office workers and factory workers, the vast majority of whom are ordinary Americans doing normal, productive, legal jobs that are unrelated to the fact that talc had asbestos.