5 ms·
There's no point whatsoever to fine banks, its stupid beyond belief. First, its like issuing a speeding ticket to a billionaire, second, the money does not come
by atirip 12y ago
There's no point whatsoever to fine banks, its stupid beyond belief. First, its like issuing a speeding ticket to a billionaire, second, the money does not come from the pocket of the offender, and third, if the unimaginable happens and some bank goes belly up because of this, then we, the taxpayers will bail it out. Again.
- JoiDegn 12y agoWhy does the money not come from the pocket of the offender? If banks don't control what their employees do and are forced to pay a hefty fine as the result of that employee doing something wrong, dont you think they will try to control what their employees are doing in the future?
- morsch 12y agoHaving a record of past misbehaviour may be useful in a future fight. Even a billionaire has his driving license revoked if he's repeatedly caught speeding. Sums that are pocket change to JPMorgan are still usefully spent in the public interest. I don't know if 60 million Euros are, in fact, pocket change for JPMorgan. I cynically assume that they budgeted in an accurate amount for fines and other regulatory hiccups when they start on these endeavours. Assuming you mean the offender is a group of executives that aren't personally liable for these sorts of fines, well, yeah, that's par for the course. IANAL. Having a bank go belly up because of these fines seems exceedingly unlikely. Regulatory oversight is (on the face of it and among other things) intended to ensure that the system is less likely to fail catastrophically, and fining banks for failing to observe regulation seems like a necessary part of this. Whether or not the regulatory oversight has the means or even the willingness to implement the mission they present to the public is another debate. I agree that scepticism is warranted. From that point of view, these kinds of fine may be characterised as something that doesn't materially affect the bank's profits and hence doesn't deter repeat misbehaviour but serves to establish a facade of regulatory action to appease the public.
- patrickk 12y ago> Even a billionaire has his driving license revoked if he's repeatedly caught speeding. More likely his driver. The billionaire can just hire another one.
- sleeping_pills 12y agoI agree with this. Fining a big organization effectively means fining their clients. They'll just pass on the costs.
- icebraining 12y agoIf they can raise their prices to pass on the costs, why haven't they done so before, increasing their profits? If they can't, how is that passing on the costs?
- bobcostas55 12y agoI think there's a very simple and elegant solution for this: fines have to be paid in the form of equity. The government can sell its share on the open market to convert equity to cash, and it's impossible for the shareholders to pass on the cost to anyone else.
- nsajko 12y agoThat sounds quite interesting. Searching for it I only found some Scots parliamentary proposals. Is this a new idea?
- bobcostas55 12y agoI just came up with it, but it's pretty obvious so I'm sure it's highly unoriginal.
- bnegreve 12y agoNationalization is the extreme example. It happened a couple of times [1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalization http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalization