4 ms·

One problem with this, is that probably most employees and business partners weren't involved in whatever was done wrong. And they'd be hurt just as much as the

One problem with this, is that probably most employees and business partners weren't involved in whatever was done wrong. And they'd be hurt just as much as the people who were involved. Maybe instead say, the people most likely to have been involved need to be replaced? So fire the board and CxO level people, or the top 3 levels of management of whichever division, or something like that. You'd get a few people who probably weren't involved and miss a few who were, but the overall collateral damage would still be much less.

jbooth 12y ago
Most employees and shareholders weren't involved in those crazy single-day trading blowups that lost billions either.
mikeash 12y ago
Car thieves have friends and family who will be hurt if the thief goes to prison, yet nobody says the thief should walk free because of that.
- tbrownaw 12y ago
  But when one person steals a car, you don't send their spouse and kids to jail with them. Right?
  - mikeash 12y ago
    Right. They just lose any benefits of associating with the convict. Similarly, employees of a "jailed" company could find new jobs or start their own businesses or whatever, but would lose what they got from the company.
  - maxxxxx 12y ago
    I think it's similar to a drug lord whose family lives with them in a nice house. If the drug lord gets convicted the children lose their house/home although they were innocent.
fnordfnordfnord 12y ago
I'm not sure that it is as bad as you think. The market vacuum created by the company's missing presence would be filled by a competitor, who would then need to hire staff. It's a strong incentive to make sure that you're involved with a company who conducts all of their business legitimately.
- rhino369 12y ago
  No way. There are tons of transaction costs and inefficiencies that come into play. Lets say you catch Micron stealing Kingston DRAM technology. SEND THEM TO JAIL! Guess what? Nobody can just kick up DRAM production instantly. Fabs have to be build or converted. Do you expect Micro workers in Manasas, Virginia to move to Taiwain to work for Winbond? Monetary penalties, if properly calculated, absolutely would incentivize legit business activity. Even if the amount is enough to force bankruptcy, that is way better than just shutting down.
  - fnordfnordfnord 12y ago
    It's not my position, I just pointed out an argument that it may not be a net negative for the industry. In principle I'd rather see far fewer crimes for which imprisonment is our answer, but, OTOH I have been curious about the potential effects of imprisonment on white collar crime. >Lets say you catch Micron stealing Kingston DRAM technology. SEND THEM TO JAIL! Guess what? Nobody can just kick up DRAM production instantly. Fabs have to be build or converted. Right, but the fabs aren't necessarily destroyed by a lawsuit; nor will it be the case that every single engineer involved with DRAM is a part of the conspiracy. >Do you expect Micro workers in Manasas, Virginia to move to Taiwain to work for Winbond? I don't expect it to be necessary, but if it were, a quarter without DRAM production would drive demand to the point that engineers capable of running Winbond's fab would be happy to relocate, at least temporarily. >Monetary penalties, if properly calculated, absolutely would incentivize legit business activity. Even if the amount is enough to force bankruptcy, that is way better than just shutting down. I'm not convinced that the regulatory schemes we currently use are particularly effective. The whole point of my comment was to explore this admittedly extreme alternative. I'm also not convinced this idea is better, but if you just dismiss it without a serious thought then you may as well not bother discussing it all.

jbooth 12y ago

Most employees and shareholders weren't involved in those crazy single-day trading blowups that lost billions either.

mikeash 12y ago

Car thieves have friends and family who will be hurt if the thief goes to prison, yet nobody says the thief should walk free because of that.

tbrownaw 12y ago
But when one person steals a car, you don't send their spouse and kids to jail with them. Right?
- mikeash 12y ago
  Right. They just lose any benefits of associating with the convict. Similarly, employees of a "jailed" company could find new jobs or start their own businesses or whatever, but would lose what they got from the company.
- maxxxxx 12y ago
  I think it's similar to a drug lord whose family lives with them in a nice house. If the drug lord gets convicted the children lose their house/home although they were innocent.

fnordfnordfnord 12y ago

I'm not sure that it is as bad as you think. The market vacuum created by the company's missing presence would be filled by a competitor, who would then need to hire staff. It's a strong incentive to make sure that you're involved with a company who conducts all of their business legitimately.

rhino369 12y ago
No way. There are tons of transaction costs and inefficiencies that come into play. Lets say you catch Micron stealing Kingston DRAM technology. SEND THEM TO JAIL! Guess what? Nobody can just kick up DRAM production instantly. Fabs have to be build or converted. Do you expect Micro workers in Manasas, Virginia to move to Taiwain to work for Winbond? Monetary penalties, if properly calculated, absolutely would incentivize legit business activity. Even if the amount is enough to force bankruptcy, that is way better than just shutting down.
- fnordfnordfnord 12y ago
  It's not my position, I just pointed out an argument that it may not be a net negative for the industry. In principle I'd rather see far fewer crimes for which imprisonment is our answer, but, OTOH I have been curious about the potential effects of imprisonment on white collar crime. >Lets say you catch Micron stealing Kingston DRAM technology. SEND THEM TO JAIL! Guess what? Nobody can just kick up DRAM production instantly. Fabs have to be build or converted. Right, but the fabs aren't necessarily destroyed by a lawsuit; nor will it be the case that every single engineer involved with DRAM is a part of the conspiracy. >Do you expect Micro workers in Manasas, Virginia to move to Taiwain to work for Winbond? I don't expect it to be necessary, but if it were, a quarter without DRAM production would drive demand to the point that engineers capable of running Winbond's fab would be happy to relocate, at least temporarily. >Monetary penalties, if properly calculated, absolutely would incentivize legit business activity. Even if the amount is enough to force bankruptcy, that is way better than just shutting down. I'm not convinced that the regulatory schemes we currently use are particularly effective. The whole point of my comment was to explore this admittedly extreme alternative. I'm also not convinced this idea is better, but if you just dismiss it without a serious thought then you may as well not bother discussing it all.