3 ms·
Actually, it's the same point. We are currently trying to punish entities (with fines), and it's ineffective. We should move back to punishing people more, an
by BiteCode_dev 2y ago
Actually, it's the same point.
We are currently trying to punish entities (with fines), and it's ineffective.
We should move back to punishing people more, and moving back the responsibility to people, instead of pretending companies are people, and therefore responsible.
- robertlagrant 2y agoBut it's such a strange angle. Should we stop companies having bank accounts in order to do that? Who cares if they have a bank account?
- BiteCode_dev 2y agoQuite the opposite, since they have bank accounts, let's: - Make them more liable. - Make the people behind them more liable. - Give companies limitations. What would be the equivalent of jail for a company ? Unable to sale for x years ? How long a company should be able to exist ? Right now there is way too much power and shielding at the same time.
- robertlagrant 2y ago> What would be the equivalent of jail for a company ? Unable to sale for x years ? How long a company should be able to exist ? If they can't sell then they don't have money, and everyone is fired. Is that what you mean? Why are you trying to make companies into physical people who can be punished separately to their employees/shareholders, instead of thinking of the actual outcome you want and coming up with something to achieve that?