4 ms·

Evidently you don't get well run organizations by simply having legislation, which is my point. We do not enforce that legislation appropriately. I'm confused

by gmd63 3y ago

Evidently you don't get well run organizations by simply having legislation, which is my point. We do not enforce that legislation appropriately. I'm confused by your point regarding the SEC, how are they allowed to fine a company without legal basis? If my use of the word "crime" means something different to you, I mean "crime" as anything that breaks the law.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> you don't get well run organizations by simply having legislation, which is my point Nobody argued as much. > I mean "crime" as anything that breaks the law This isn’t what “crime” means. Painting your house the wrong colour may be against code, but it isn’t a crime. Legally, the difference is starker, as nobody was shown to have done anything wrong here beyond the benefit of doubt.
- gmd63 3y ago
  > Just require good organization and you’ll get it by diktat? This is what I was responding to. You seemed to be insinuating that I didn't understand that laws or rules are not sufficient deterrents. > nobody was shown to have done anything wrong here beyond the benefit of doubt I'm still confused as to how the SEC was able to fine someone for not committing any wrongdoing, exact definition of the word "crime" which I have clarified I used to mean "general rule breaking" aside.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    Deleting records that are legally required to be retained is not “no wrongdoing”.
    - gmd63 3y ago
      I agree. From my point of view there is definite wrongdoing, and it is not adequately punished. I'm trying to understand the other commentor's point of view as to how the bank was fined if there was no alleged wrongdoing. They had earlier asked "Where is the crime here?"
dragonwriter 3y ago
> I'm confused by your point regarding the SEC, how are they allowed to fine a company without legal basis? There is a legal basis: retention requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. From the SEC order: “As a result of the conduct described above, JPMorgan willfully violated Section 17(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 17a-4(b)(4) thereunder, which require brokerdealers to preserve for at least three years originals of all communications received and copies of all communications sent relating to its business as such.”

by gmd63 3y ago

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> you don't get well run organizations by simply having legislation, which is my point Nobody argued as much. > I mean "crime" as anything that breaks the law This isn’t what “crime” means. Painting your house the wrong colour may be against code, but it isn’t a crime. Legally, the difference is starker, as nobody was shown to have done anything wrong here beyond the benefit of doubt.

gmd63 3y ago
> Just require good organization and you’ll get it by diktat? This is what I was responding to. You seemed to be insinuating that I didn't understand that laws or rules are not sufficient deterrents. > nobody was shown to have done anything wrong here beyond the benefit of doubt I'm still confused as to how the SEC was able to fine someone for not committing any wrongdoing, exact definition of the word "crime" which I have clarified I used to mean "general rule breaking" aside.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  Deleting records that are legally required to be retained is not “no wrongdoing”.
  - gmd63 3y ago
    I agree. From my point of view there is definite wrongdoing, and it is not adequately punished. I'm trying to understand the other commentor's point of view as to how the bank was fined if there was no alleged wrongdoing. They had earlier asked "Where is the crime here?"

dragonwriter 3y ago

> I'm confused by your point regarding the SEC, how are they allowed to fine a company without legal basis? There is a legal basis: retention requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. From the SEC order: “As a result of the conduct described above, JPMorgan willfully violated Section 17(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 17a-4(b)(4) thereunder, which require brokerdealers to preserve for at least three years originals of all communications received and copies of all communications sent relating to its business as such.”