4 ms·

What is hilarious to me is how the US government or courts doesn't seem to give a shit about this. Corporativism in US is a thing. Companies can brick hospital

What is hilarious to me is how the US government or courts doesn't seem to give a shit about this. Corporativism in US is a thing. Companies can brick hospital systems killing patients, drive self-driving cars and run over people but don't get sued, and if they do, they settle for very little. Just look at the recent Boeing incident where people were killed, the company clearly misled the US authorities and settled only a $0.5B fine. Those companies in those scenarios should pay the fine that they should ($20B+), and if it means the company would go bankrupt, do it and form a new company diluting the previous shareholders. Without doing this, shareholders and CEOs will have the incentive to carry on with their unfair practices that leads to dead people and deadlocked systems.

Tarsul 2y ago
what if the fine was giving up some shares to the government? With such a rule, after enough fines, the company would basically automatically become a public company.
- Hamuko 2y ago
  Sounds too much like socialism to go anyhere.
  - withinboredom 2y ago
    It depends on who you want to punish, the shareholders, who have to give up their shares ... or the company, which doesn't really give a crap, as a whole.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > what if the fine was giving up some shares to the government? What is the advantage over just fining? We keep trying to reïnvent the fine, which is great for those who would otherwise be fined.
- onetokeoverthe 2y ago
  [dead]
hda111 2y ago
I think you meant US companies. The fine for Volkswagen was $20B+.
- null_investor 2y ago
  That's why the EU needs to kick out big tech and be much more unfriendly to US companies, have its own atomic bombs and security and not be dependant on a country that every election it's foreign policy completely changes (Democrats vs. republicans) It feels like US can hit as much as they can EU companies, but EU needs to create a whole new regulation to slap a $1B fine in a 2 trillion company from the US.
wkat4242 2y ago
> Just look at the recent Boeing incident where people were killed, the company clearly misled the US authorities and settled only a $0.5B fine. The problem is when you fine a company, they will just turn around and offload that cost to their customers. Which in this case is the US government in a very large way. Boeing will make their part in the SLS a few billion more expensive again to offset it and even gain some profit. The US government are just fining themselves. Fines just aren't an effective deterrent for companies. They should go back to imposing personal sentences on their leadership. But this is really unpopular because these guys are so well connected. So basically nothing is done and everyone goes free.
- aoeusnth1 2y ago
  You could force the company to pay the fine in the form of a % ownership stake in the company. Then if the company raises prices to hose the government, the extra profit flows back to the government in dividends.
  - kristjank 2y ago
    That actually sounds pretty compelling...
- WhyNotHugo 2y ago
  The problem here is that "the company" is liable for the negligence of the person in charge. The person in charge is not liable for anything. And like you said, if the company has to pay, then the money obviously comes from its customers, not from the person in charge.
- simiones 2y ago
  That only works when the company has full power to set prices unilaterally, i.e. when it has monopoly power. Which is a separate problem that should be prevented separately. If Cisco gets fined a billion dollars, it can't just hike up the price of a router, as it will lose plenty of business to Juniper/Arista/F5/etc.
  - 2y ago
surfingdino 2y ago
If you want this to change, ban the CEO from holding a similar job or sitting on a board. If that doesn't work ban them from Aspen.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

Tarsul 2y ago

what if the fine was giving up some shares to the government? With such a rule, after enough fines, the company would basically automatically become a public company.

Hamuko 2y ago
Sounds too much like socialism to go anyhere.
- withinboredom 2y ago
  It depends on who you want to punish, the shareholders, who have to give up their shares ... or the company, which doesn't really give a crap, as a whole.
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> what if the fine was giving up some shares to the government? What is the advantage over just fining? We keep trying to reïnvent the fine, which is great for those who would otherwise be fined.
onetokeoverthe 2y ago
[dead]

hda111 2y ago

I think you meant US companies. The fine for Volkswagen was $20B+.

null_investor 2y ago
That's why the EU needs to kick out big tech and be much more unfriendly to US companies, have its own atomic bombs and security and not be dependant on a country that every election it's foreign policy completely changes (Democrats vs. republicans) It feels like US can hit as much as they can EU companies, but EU needs to create a whole new regulation to slap a $1B fine in a 2 trillion company from the US.

wkat4242 2y ago

> Just look at the recent Boeing incident where people were killed, the company clearly misled the US authorities and settled only a $0.5B fine. The problem is when you fine a company, they will just turn around and offload that cost to their customers. Which in this case is the US government in a very large way. Boeing will make their part in the SLS a few billion more expensive again to offset it and even gain some profit. The US government are just fining themselves. Fines just aren't an effective deterrent for companies. They should go back to imposing personal sentences on their leadership. But this is really unpopular because these guys are so well connected. So basically nothing is done and everyone goes free.

aoeusnth1 2y ago
You could force the company to pay the fine in the form of a % ownership stake in the company. Then if the company raises prices to hose the government, the extra profit flows back to the government in dividends.
- kristjank 2y ago
  That actually sounds pretty compelling...
WhyNotHugo 2y ago
The problem here is that "the company" is liable for the negligence of the person in charge. The person in charge is not liable for anything. And like you said, if the company has to pay, then the money obviously comes from its customers, not from the person in charge.
simiones 2y ago
That only works when the company has full power to set prices unilaterally, i.e. when it has monopoly power. Which is a separate problem that should be prevented separately. If Cisco gets fined a billion dollars, it can't just hike up the price of a router, as it will lose plenty of business to Juniper/Arista/F5/etc.
- 2y ago

surfingdino 2y ago

If you want this to change, ban the CEO from holding a similar job or sitting on a board. If that doesn't work ban them from Aspen.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]