6 ms·

It should be the people hold responsible

• ocdtrekkie 2y ago
  You sort of need to do both. The issue at hand with a corporate death penalty is shareholders. If a company being "killed" zeroes out the value for shareholders, the stock value will have to price in the likelihood of complete loss due to malfeasance, which will start making companies on the level a safer buy. This means companies doing more to prevent illegal behavior become worth more and companies have a financial reason to prevent crime greatly exceeding mere fines.
  • bombcar 2y ago
    Exactly. Everyone likes to say "kill the board and CEO" but they're just employees of the shareholders. At some time collective punishment to match collective gains needs to be considered; even if they're not personally liable they can still lose their investment.
    • ocdtrekkie 2y ago
      Exactly. The common criticism of this is that... yeah, that means the punishment will impact people who had no say in the decision, seniors' retirement funds, etc. But that is just risk, which is what the entire stock market is designed to correct for. And a good investment portfolio is always supposed to hedge risks by spreading them across multiple investments. It'll drive prices down for riskier stocks, more involved larger shareholders will have reason to get more involved and ask more questions about compliance and corporate responsibility, etc. Being able to punish shareholders for bad corporate behavior for corporate death is, to be honest just good capitalism.
• dylan604 2y ago
  If the level has been reached to discuss corporate death penalty, then the corporation employees should loose any protections the corporation normally provides.