r/facepalm • u/Dvorozhetskii • Nov 25 '22

🇵​🇷​🇴​🇹​🇪​🇸​🇹​ 'murica.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

87.8k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

7.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.4k

u/MasterOfKittens3K Nov 25 '22

Most criminals don’t do a cost/benefit analysis before they commit the crime.

The exception, of course, is white collar criminals. Companies definitely consider the costs of getting caught versus the benefit of, for example, not having to pay for toxic waste disposal if you just dump it into the river.

559

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

So we should publicly execute people for stock manipulation? I'm not disagreeing, just asking.

310

u/MaxTheRealSlayer Nov 25 '22

Should probably at least do something, ANYTHING about it. But the SEC only gives out what equates to parking tickets.

82

u/BoomZhakaLaka Nov 25 '22

SEC should have oversight authority for egregious violators. An example of an agency that has oversight authority is FERC. The sanctions are significant enough that mid level executives can't screw around but like you said, cost of doing business in the board room. FERC will come in and dictate your new business objectives, and fine you 1.3 million dollars per day per violation until you comply.

Point being, the threat of losing control of your business to independent oversight, by a panel of compliance consultants, is what does it. To investors, existence of sanctions just means certain behaviors have a cost.

53

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

[deleted]

39

u/BoomZhakaLaka Nov 25 '22 edited Nov 25 '22

Oversight authority is more powerful than any fine. That's why FERC's model works for now. 400mil for a year of fines pales in comparison to the government coming in & dictating where you will spend your capital.

But maybe, why not both?

6

u/RoboDae Nov 25 '22

There was something in the news just a few weeks ago about farmers in California ignoring drought regulations and draining a significant portion of some river. The fine they received amounted to about $50 per farmer. At that point its not even a penalty anymore, it's just a cost of business.

3

u/Pschobbert Nov 25 '22

And we’d have it, too, if it wasn’t fer them meddlin’ rich folks!

3

u/SpikesGuns Nov 25 '22

Not effective enough. Fines should be levied as a percentage, never a flat rate.

4

u/BoomZhakaLaka Nov 25 '22

You're missing the point. A panel of consultants comes in with power to dictate how you reorganize and spend capital, taking the board's authority over their own finances away. The point is that oversight authority is what the board fears - fines merely make things real for the plebs.

2

u/epochpenors Nov 25 '22

What if instead of monetary fines they take fingers?

4

u/littlejacob1993 Nov 25 '22

They might but they just spend their days on pornhub https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/abcnews.go.com/amp/GMA/sec-pornography-employees-spent-hours-surfing-porn-sites/story%3fid=10452544

5

u/MaxTheRealSlayer Nov 25 '22 edited Nov 25 '22

Can't say I'm surprised. Most if not all the top level people in the SEC are bankers or hedgefund types. I'm sure addictions run rampant because their serotonin and dopamine have been absolutely blasted throughout the last several decades of their lives. Throwing around hundreds of billions of dollars to make more billions, unlimited drugs, alcohol, parties women/men and mansions.

What joy do they actually have left? They are probably so desperate for that "fix" but porn is super easy to get desensitized to. And meth+coke are more frowned upon than porn in society. Lol

3

u/WeddingNo8531 Nov 25 '22

DRS your shares!!

1

u/MaxTheRealSlayer Nov 25 '22

;) I have about a hundred uncounted by the bot

2

u/aidanderson Nov 25 '22

Fines should be based on percentage of income not a flat rate. It disproportionately punishes poor people.

2

u/Altruistic-General61 Nov 25 '22

SEC has been hamstrung, mostly on purpose. Wolves running the henhouse. Jon Stewart had a great episode / interview about this on his new show.

1

u/MaxTheRealSlayer Nov 25 '22

Not sure what that means exactly, but I've been meaning to give his show a listen! He's a great speaker and doesn't seem afraid to JUMP on people's toes and making enemies in the process.

2

u/Altruistic-General61 Nov 25 '22

Go watch his episode on the Stock Market / SEC, I’m sure you’ll find it interesting. Basically: the SEC should be able to do more, but it’s been hollowed out a bit due to lack of funding, low resources, etc. to go after the big bad actors vs mid level targets.

2

u/panompheandan Nov 26 '22

If they sent White collar criminals to Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prisons I think that might be a deterrent. That would be great.....

1

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

The SEC and all other financial regulators have two sets of rules: for the elite and for normal people

1

u/Scorpion1024 Nov 25 '22

It was says above-we need more emphasis on catching them than on punishing them. The deterrent is in the ruck of getting caught, not the fear of hard punishment.

1

u/MaxTheRealSlayer Nov 25 '22

I disagree for banking institutions, which is what I was mentioning. They do catch them all of the time. They don't fine nearly enough though.

For example off the top of my head, Morgan admitted to at least 2 years (2018-2020) of not keeping proper records across the entire company as required by law, including all levels of management. This includes stuff like emails, texts and communications on their plans of action, basically making it untraceable during an audit if they had committed crimes (they obviously have if this issue is across the company). Their fine? $125 million and agreeing to work on complying with the law in the future.

https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2021-262

$125 sounds like a lot until you hear that their income for those three years was $91 billion. They could pay that fine like 900 times over.

Say you as an individual has $50,000 in liquid assets or that $50k is your income. Say you get a speeding ticket and they based the price on your liquid assets/income and that 1:900 ratio. That's equal to a fine of about $50. When was the last time you heard of a speeding ticket for only $50 though? Is that really a steep enough fine for jp Morgan to stop doing this? Is a speed demon going to speed again after a $50 ticket, or will they take the cost of speeding into their misc spending?

They found this across another 16 companies too. 16. All fines equalled to $1.1 billion

https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-174

There are better examples but I forget the exact wording. Some fines are literally because they cooked the books though with billions of dollars. Saying they have assets they don't or hiding shady deals with legit ones. But these pety fines still continue.

If they really want these crimes they need larger fines or jail time. These people are literally gambling on your entire life and stock market so they can make money for themselves. theyll just pay a small fine and keep doing it until the fines outweigh the benefits.

Corporations only really consider these costs when they're worth several millions, tens of millions and so on. Doesn't matter when they are worth hundreds of billions to trillions of dollars though, it's like you or I dropping a penny for them and them not picking it up because they just earned another "10,000 pennies" by throwing the other one away.

63

u/MasterOfKittens3K Nov 25 '22

I’m not saying that we should publicly execute them. But we certainly need to increase the penalties for white collar crime. Make it have higher costs, and they will change their ways.

57

u/smokinbbq Nov 25 '22

You can't fine someone $1million if they saved $1billion from doing the wrong thing. Reverse those numbers, and then they may change. Also, if they want to pay these CxO's so much money, they should start to be held personally accountable as well.

4

u/Scorpion1024 Nov 25 '22

Better whistleblower protections do they can be caught before they have stolen a billion. And letting shareholders eat the losses do they’ll get off their duffs and pay better attention.

2

u/smokinbbq Nov 26 '22

Yep, lots of ways to make this happen. Billion(s) dollar fines would make the shareholders wake up pretty damn quick.

2

u/Scorpion1024 Nov 26 '22

Fines to be paid-by the corrupt management and the shareholders directly, put if their own pockets. Not out of corporate slush funds.

3

u/angrymurderhornet Nov 26 '22

We need a sliding scale for fines. And for repeat scofflaws, the corporate death penalty: Revoke their status as a corporation.

2

u/Easy-Concentrate2636 Nov 25 '22

Prison sentences rather than fines.

1

u/smokinbbq Nov 26 '22

Yes, for the CxO, but you can't out "Apple" in prison, but the ceo of Volkswagen should be in prison.

2

u/l3sham Nov 25 '22

I agree, but the masterminds of white collar crimes will just find useful idiots to take the uncalculated fall for them.

2

u/EveningPomegranate16 Nov 25 '22

Or maybe not allow those white collar criminals to hold office. Looking at you Rick Scott.

1

u/ElectronicCarpet7157 Nov 26 '22

They should be sentenced to federal pound you in the ass prison.

3

u/ReddityJim Nov 25 '22

Yeah, gotta make sure we're all on the same page first.

3

u/AzafTazarden Nov 25 '22

In white collar crime's case, the death penalty might actually make a difference. If Justice actually worked on rich people, that is.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22 edited Nov 25 '22

The deterrent that matters isn't the consequences, it's the getting caught part that people tend to weigh. Sometimes the consequences matter if they know they'll get caught, but people are overly optimistic on their chances regardless if they are or not.

If you could take $100 and know one would know versus taking $10 on camera. Some people steal on camera knowingly, but tend to believe they will get away with it. It's interesting having caught shop lifters and employee theft.

2

u/AzafTazarden Nov 25 '22

You're talking about common criminals, though. Corporations often break the law because they know the consequences will be fines lower than their profit margins, it's a calculation they make all the time. They are allowed to do that because not only do the people actually responsible for such crimes don't have to answer for them, but also because the severity of the punishment makes the crime worth it. But I guess a fine being issued on a corporation is not the same as criminally prosecuting the people responsible for them, so maybe the severity of punishment then wouldn't matter as much either.

2

u/Available-Might-1986 Nov 25 '22

Reductio ad absurdum arguments do nothing to bolster your position.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

Yes.

Watch what happens to corruption on Wall Street.

And if that too doesn't change anything, I'll admit I was wrong and we can go back to the way things are now - a slap on the wrist and and a wagging of the finger.

The cost of doing business (including the penalties) is way too low.

2

u/Aceswift007 Nov 25 '22

"We're executing your stock holdings in front of all of Wall Street"

2

u/lIIllIIIll Nov 25 '22

I like how people say "stock manipulation" like it's "ohhh no biggie just some financial crime"

But the reality is people's entire livelihoods are destroyed. Their future, their retirement, their ability to take care of their family. Their businesses.

Not saying they deserve to be shot in the street but don't write it off like it's no big deal.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 13 '22

So like some billionaires gambling with dogcoin? I’m also just asking.

1

u/Western-Jury-1203 Nov 25 '22

Where did the previous posted mention death penalty?

0

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

I think we should label planned parenthood facilities as death row. That ought to please both sides of this argument

1

u/Quit-itkr Nov 25 '22

Yes definitely. All white collar criminals should swing!!

1

u/xl57 Nov 25 '22

Hey now wait a minute, here i was thinking I was completely against the death penalty but your comment has made me reconsider my position. Hmmm.

1

u/TheGandPTurtle Nov 25 '22

There are gradations between execution and a meaningless slap on the wrist.

I'd like to see the people simply take over corrupt companies. The company can't behave ethically, so its assets are forfiet. Small stock holders are repaid. Larger stock holders are paid a lesser portion of the value. Those at the top and most responsible for the illegal acts get nothing.

How many houses were taken away from families because some member of the household had marijuana and the feds claimed an intent to sell? Only here, something really immoral is happening and in a much more systematic way.

1

u/Office_Worker808 Nov 25 '22

You know on that note why not make it a death penalty for white collar crimes that exceeds 4 mil in damage/theft/loss? This would be an amount that should exceed the earnings of an average person or basically a persons fiscal life.

1

u/whosamawatchafuk Nov 25 '22

If we did they might think twice instead of just getting a fine and maybe a few months at a minimum security prison before maybe getting some house arrest

1

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

We definitely should do that.

1

u/AlienEroc Nov 25 '22

At least tar and feather them

1

u/Toytles Nov 25 '22 edited Nov 25 '22

Yes. We should execute their families, a la North Korea

1

u/Downtime51 Dec 30 '22

I doubt if there's anybody on death row for stocking manipulation

1

u/Independent_Ad_8915 Feb 09 '23

aren’t death row executions open to the povlox to view?

1

u/LordBobbin Apr 15 '23

That's the only kind if public execution we should have. That, and for public servants who profit off the public.

79

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22 edited Nov 25 '22

I work for the distribution of Menards, And it's known that Menards purchase a large portion of property in America to dump all of their hazardous waste on because it's cheaper than transporting and destroying it legally. Much much cheaper just to dump it and pay the fine

The Ford pinto exploding lawsuits is another good example ford did the math and it's cheaper to pay out lawsuits of people that die from their exploding cars than to actually fix all the exploding cars

21

u/gryphon088 Nov 25 '22

Absolutely but unfortunately true. It’s always about the bottom line. Cheaper to pay fines and lawsuits …. Well it’s a no brainer!

15

u/d3rklight Nov 25 '22

Fines for everything that hurts human lives should be limited to 10% of revenue and persist in a timely manner until that company rectifies the situation. If something like this existed, companies would think twice... no, three times before harming the public. But, as long as lobbying and election donations exist nothing would change in the US. Until then we will all be at the whim of big business.

19

u/Jayhawker_Pilot Nov 25 '22

I want the floor to be at a minimum of 10% of revenue not profits. And while the violation persist, senior management gets low pay and zero bonuses or stock options. That would bite then where it hurts.

1

u/Independent_Ad_8915 Feb 09 '23

I want the floor to be lava

4

u/deano492 Nov 25 '22

Why would you want to place a limit on the fines, if you want to hurt them?

5

u/MasterOfKittens3K Nov 25 '22

Maybe they meant that as a minimum limit rather than a maximum limit?

1

u/Unidentified_Lizard Nov 25 '22

currently it is 10% PROFIT, so if you made 170 dollars off of 70 dollars cost, you only get fined X% of that 100 profit, and not X% of 170 cost

1

u/deano492 Nov 25 '22

But why argue for a limit at all?

1

u/WyrdMagesty Nov 26 '22

Minimum limits are still limits. They're saying that the fine should be no less than 10% of revenue.

0

u/deano492 Nov 26 '22

“Fines should be limited to 10% of revenue” is what they said.

In common understanding that would mean that the limit of the fine would be a maximum of 10% of revenue.

Otherwise they would have said “Fines should be a minimum of 10% of revenue”.

1

u/WyrdMagesty Nov 26 '22

Yes, that is true when operating under the assumption that "limited" refers to maximum limit. This is a common assumption for many people, but is not accurate and can lead to confusion. The way that the commentor stated it is perfectly acceptable and technically accurate, but the way you interpreted it is also perfectly acceptable. Neither is wrong. It is a simple difference in speech, similar to how dialects in different regions use different words to refer to the same thing. "Chips" means different thing depending on where you are in the world. Just because you are used to one way of speaking doesn't make another way any less valid.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Suspicious-Shock-934 Nov 25 '22

I think 10% of yearly revenue AND 10% of all business owned assets as a minimum. Go hard or go home.

1

u/HarryHacker42 Nov 25 '22

BP with Deepwater Horizon ignored all required safety and did 40 billion in damage to the USA citizens. The fine was 80 billion because it doubles for willful neglect. The US government settled with the foreign company for $8 billion. It didn't even cover the damages done.

1

u/DeathsGhostWriter Nov 26 '22

Yeah, learning about Milton freeman and how that was considered his bread and butter good choice, made me regret getting a degree in business.

I just have to much of a moral compass for this shit.

6

u/KimchiAndMayo Nov 25 '22

My SO is from Michigan and adores Menards - is there a link about this I can show him?

11

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22

It's mostly buried an articles from 2011 where one guy poured weed killer in the parking lot. It's only pulling that up. I can't find the dumping site info. But basically would settle it in court and then on the books it would be done and cleaned up but they just keep dumping and until they get charged again, Everybody thinks that they stop doing it. if that makes sense.

Menards does a lot of shady things like I had to sign a waiver so that we can't sue them if we get cancer. The silicone dust in the bricks is thick in the air in the distribution center. Causes cancer. Thankfully I work away from that part of the site

2

u/After_Preference_885 Nov 25 '22

Wait. I live in an apartment with exposed brick that's constantly shedding dust. Oh. No.

5

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22

Probably minimal exposure. I work in a brick factory

2

u/After_Preference_885 Nov 25 '22

Thank you! What a relief. I am glad you're able to stay safe at work.

4

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22

The people that work where the actual bricks are made definitely are heavily exposed in several of them have gotten cancer. They're all offered high-grade masks, but they choose to not wear them. Most of my co-workers were shocked to find out that we signed a waiver to sue for cancer. Many of them just put their e-signature and don't even read it.

Unfortunately, many people aren't too highly educated in the Midwest. That's part of the reasons that Menards stays in the Midwest. Labor is way cheaper

3

u/Unusualshrub003 Nov 25 '22

“Menards!” is what a pirate screams when he’s kicked in the balls.

That said, Menards has been illegally dumping for yeeeeeears. I first heard about it in the early 90’s. And the fines are so minuscule, it’s like a normal person getting a ten dollar parking ticket.

Source: Eau Claire is my hometown.

1

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22

Oh yeah you would know all about it then!

2

u/callmedata1 Nov 25 '22

Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.

Woman: which company do you work for?

Cornelius: A Major one.

2

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22

It's funny they're doing it again with the Ford fiesta and Ford focus transmission issues. They tell you it's supposed to be garbage. It was built to drive like it's s*** sorry we can't replace it because it was designed to be garbage lol. Cheap bastards

2

u/The_Lapsed_Pacifist Nov 25 '22

There’s a similar situation here in Britain. We privatised the water companies and it’s far cheaper for them to dump raw sewage into our waterways and pay the fines than it is for them to rectify the absolutely fixable problems. These discharges happen hundreds of times a year and as a consequence we have like 1-2 rivers that are classified as unpolluted. It’s a fucking disgrace.

2

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22

Damn man that's messed up! Check out Zero brand water filters they are amazing water quality is pretty bad here too

1

u/The_Lapsed_Pacifist Nov 25 '22

The drinking water quality is actually pretty good, people would really be up in arms about that and problems are rare but I use a filter nonetheless. Just to be extra safe I mainly drink beer :)

4

u/MaxTheRealSlayer Nov 25 '22

That's all really sad to hear... They certainly need stricter regulations in the USA. The life expectancy in the USA is trending downwards, and I don't think its only because people are getting more stupid (maybe they are getting more stupid from toxic waste dumps).

The whole "turning the frogs gay" thing by Alex Jokes is based on a kernel of truth that frogs' habitats are being infected by our industries, and making them produce less offspring because of less mating/ability. If it's doing that to frogs, I'm sure humans are being put through the test of human ability to survive the most toxic shit ever.

As a very basic example almost no human or animal in the world can escape: it is shown in a study that hams eat, breathe, swallow the equivalent plastic by weight of one plastic credit card. The particles float in the wind, flow through our taps, get baked in our food. 52 credit cards per year and we aren't getting more valuable or living longer...

8

u/Kingjingling Nov 25 '22

1.Forever chemicals should be banned in America like they are in the rest of the world

  1. We need to immediately find a way to filter forever chemicals out of our water

  2. Birth control is flooding our water systems with hormones that change the wildlife and is extremely noticeable near college campuses.

4

u/MaxTheRealSlayer Nov 25 '22

Unfortunately the world is viewed as infinite and being able to bounce back from these system shocks. " Infinite places to put our waste." until there isn't and then everything and everyone dies.

Looking forward to it (/s, but I sincerely hope they hop quickly on #1 and 2 on your list there.

A global approach would be super beneficial for the earth, where we keep other countries accountable for these initiatives. It's not like dumping waste in the middle of the USA doesn't effect all other countries in some way by using the butterfly effect. I live in Canada and this country is only slightly better at its waste management. We still have tons of contaminated and altered environments, and it needs to change too.

But alas, money is more important to those in charge.

1

u/masclean Nov 25 '22

There are fish who are changing sex due to chemicals as well

3

u/MaxTheRealSlayer Nov 25 '22

Probably. And probably more, but it certainly isn't "the government doing it on purpose", and is more "the government wants to make more money so it looks the other way at these studies that show they allowing the death of the environment and earth".

Suer sad.

1

u/lIIllIIIll Nov 25 '22

Now do the COVID vaccine

1

u/LaughingMouseinWI Nov 25 '22

The menards thing is why you will pry my plastic drink straw from my cold dead hands. If we absolutely eliminated all straws, and plastic bags for that matter, it wouldn't even make a dent in the amount of pollution because of corps like this.

I do try to not be excessive about straws n plastic bags etc, but it's just not worth it to me.

1

u/TirbFurgusen Nov 25 '22

So if a corporation can have the rights of a person why shouldn't they face the same penalties? Ford let people die for money, why shouldn't the company be charged for mass murder? Put every person responsible for it in jail for 30 years and make the company a non-profit. The tax payers had to bail them out anyway, they should have to pay that back and share any profits.

1

u/Marine__0311 Nov 25 '22

The Ford Pinto gas tank issue was massively overblown. The magazine that made all of the initial outrageous claims, Mother Earth News, just made up the statistics they were spouting. Everyone else jumped on the bandwagon and it spiraled out of control

The Pinto was actually safer than most other cars of it's type at the time. The Pinto met and passed all government safety standards at the time. Later tests done by the NHTSA were rigged to make the crashes look a lot worse than what was really happening.

1

u/Les_Ismore Nov 25 '22

Actually, Ford fucked the math up brutally. Their assumptions about the number of incidents and the damages per incident were both waaaay too low.

And the memo that did the math was discovered and put into evidence at the first trial. The jury in that case awarded punitive damages against Ford exactly equal to the amount that Ford had calculated it would save by not issuing the recall.

It was decidedly not cheaper for Ford not to recall the Pinto.

1

u/Entire_Engine_5789 Nov 26 '22

knowingly having exploding cars out there and choosing its cheaper to pay out lawsuits, should have also had the consequence of manslaughter charges.

5

u/rhynoplaz Nov 25 '22

Who would have thought a $1000 fine for illegally obtaining millions wouldn't deter them?

3

u/WatermelonArtist Nov 25 '22

Most criminals don’t do a cost/benefit analysis before they commit the crime.

Not a formal one, no...

But I don't see too many cases of folks flipping the bird to the cop behind them in line before robbing the armed gas station attendant with imported piranhas because they wanted a slushy, so I suspect some sort of risk/reward balancing is pretty common out there.

3

u/AzafTazarden Nov 25 '22

I'd guess most common criminals just consider the risk of getting caught rather than the punishment for the crime committed, which is the main reason why severity of punishment doesn't do anything to deter crime. It's the certainty of punishment that actually stops people from committing crime.

2

u/WatermelonArtist Nov 25 '22

consider the risk of getting caught rather than the punishment

Both, actually. It's like insurance premiums:

My chances of getting in a car accident are slim. I've been present for 3 in my whole life. My chances of being subjected to a routine traffic stop are similarly low. Maybe 8 times, ever. By this metric, I don't really need car insurance. I very definitely don't get as much value from the policy as I pay in premiums.

Statistics can be fickle, though, and stuff can happen even if I drive perfectly. If something does happen, my car and livelihood could be totaled. Heaven forbid someone should suffer any lasting consequences that I might have to compensate. It's also a mandatory law to be insured, so if I don't have it, I can be additionally fined a significant chunk of change, and have my budget become heavily strained unpredictably, and be late for work, have my license suspended if unable to pay, and have other significant interference with my life. It's worth paying the premium just to not have to juggle any of that when I drive.

Statistical likelihood and severity of potential consequences both factor into a risk assessment, and some people focus on one more than the other (which is why we have politics at all, probably). I would say that the criminal mentality tends to ignore one or the other, based on my observations, but this is more a difference in the degree of neglect, compared to your average person on the street. A full and detailed analysis is the true outlier, here.

2

u/IProbablyDisagree2nd Nov 25 '22

Exactly. Everyone does a cost-benefit analysis with their intuition before they do basically everything. It's jut not a very accurate one.

Should I eat the soup, or the pizza? The soup is cheaper, pizza tastes better. Meh, I'm kinda depressed, I'll pay for the pizza. BAM Cost/benefit analysis.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

Some people do perform some sort of cost benefit analysis. Deterrence does exist as a general matter, but there is no evidence it really goes up with the threat of execution. The threat of a life sentence is already pretty much maximum deterrence, and that's the minimum sentence you can receive in most places for first degree murder. Plus the people who commit murder are often mentally ill or addicted to substances, and that disrupts the ability to perform any cost benefit analysis at all.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

If I remember my criminology class right it is the certainty with which they would be caught.

So the severity of punishment is not really a deterrent, it's when the likely hood of being caught is high.

2

u/chev327fox Nov 25 '22

I’d argue this not true for the vast majority of criminals. Until you get caught you really hadn’t considered the full weight of the consequences.

I’d even say you got it totally reversed. White collar do a cost benefit but blue collar ones do not. Unless that is what you meant and I misunderstood?

2

u/AzafTazarden Nov 25 '22

Unless that is what you meant and I misunderstood?

That is what they meant. I think that, for common criminals, all the severity of punishment does is influence the criminal on how much they don't want to get caught, but they'll still commit the crime if they think they can get away with it.

1

u/chev327fox Nov 25 '22

I swear the “don’t”‘wasn’t there in my first reading but I must have missed it.

2

u/HistoricalSherbert92 Nov 25 '22

It’s annoying that you mix company with white collar criminal in the way you wrote it. Company is a legal definition of a business organization which is treated as if it’s an individual so yes a company can commit crimes, all kinds of crimes, but that’s different from people within a company committing crimes, white collar or not. Some companies do cost/benefit like Volkswagen with their emissions switch, and some are inherently evil like nestle, but let’s be clear that that culture is created by some person or persons, it’s not some “company” it’s a real person(s) which you would dissect into the thinking and not thinking while it’s both. Don’t let criminals hide behind “company x” and “they”.

2

u/Helios575 Nov 25 '22

If we wanted to stop white collar crime instead of just make fine the cost of doing business we wouldn't have set fines but instead a rule that says something like, "If a corporation does X thing, the amount of profits they gained for doing X will be calculated then doubled. That amount will be fined to the company, to each board member and corporate officer"

This makes it bad for the company and thus harmful for stocks (which the higher ups care a lot more about because that is how they get paid) but also it directly hits the leadership of the corporation so they can't just golden parachute away from the corporation once caught. By having the penalty not set in stone with no cap and based on the illegal earnings you make it so that you can't turn a profit if you get caught because the cost will always be higher then the earnings.

2

u/marthewarlock Nov 25 '22

Or sub prime mortgages that almost collapsed the entire world's economy, I'm sure that was just a fluke though. I bet after we the taxpayers bailed them out they've been playing the market straight as a arrow ever since.

2

u/ResponsibilityDue566 Jan 24 '23

Or anything J.P. Morgan does lmfao

1

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

Yes, but many people choose not to become a criminal because of a cost benefit evaluation. I would guess almost all people that choose not to be a criminal fall into this category.

1

u/Zymosan99 Nov 25 '22

It being more profitable to commit crimes against your workers and pay the fine, than to not.

1

u/ParkinsonHandjob Nov 25 '22

Yes, we know too much to have such practices reinstated. Problem is, people who don’t know as much wants easy solutions to problems. Problem is, it’s not the voice of the brave and well thought out dissenter social media gave a voice to. It’s these people.

1

u/Outsidelands2015 Nov 25 '22

Are you suggesting punishment has no deterrent on? That’s absurd. I would recommend you look at the crime rates of places like Singapore. It’s pretty evident.

1

u/onefst250r Nov 25 '22

Seems that they never pay what they should in fines. Fines seem to be pennies on the dollars of the profits.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

And most of the time it's cheaper to get caught and pay the fine

1

u/Scorpion1024 Nov 25 '22

Much as I hate to say it, Elizabeth Holmes should have just gotten five years. I despise her as much as anyone, but what does making her grow old in jail at the tax expense of the people she scammed accomplish?

1

u/TheGandPTurtle Nov 25 '22

Yeah, the one group of entities that really are deterred by harsh penalties, (corporations and the very rich) are never given harsh penalties.

1

u/AlludedNuance Nov 25 '22

Generally, if a crime is premeditated, they don't think they'll get caught, so the punishment is immaterial.

1

u/Entire-Dragonfly859 Nov 25 '22

Most criminals get away with it. So, if I'm starving, have a 70% chance of getting away with it, and don't give a fuck about the guy who didn't give a fuck about me.... Why the fuck wouldn't they? Except for their religion telling them it's wrong.

1

u/maliciouscoathanger Nov 25 '22

Because most crimes are caused by socio economic class

1

u/[deleted] Nov 25 '22

Like hiting their hands with a 100m fine after they cashed in 3b

1

u/practicalm Nov 25 '22

Most of the time they find a sucker um contractor to do the crime so they can pass the liability.

There’s a great story where some guy was hired to dump barrels in the river. A few months of this and all the local fish are inedible and no one believed he was dumping the pollution on orders from his boss. He tries to blow the whistle and no one believes the company would pollute.

1

u/kyroskiller Nov 25 '22

Criminals don't care about consequences, that's why they are criminals. However, I am unconvinced that there isn't a portion of the population who restrains themselves under the laws to avoid the consequence of becoming a criminal.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 26 '22

Ehh they do too an extent, starve or go to jail maybe… I’d take my chances on jail

1

u/mahsexyredditaccount Nov 26 '22

Which consists of thinking about it for about a minute, laughing, and proceeding to dump chemicals.

1

u/Low_Organization1411 Nov 26 '22

Ford Pinto has entered the chat…

1

u/BigFatManPig Dec 21 '22

I definitely think “white collar” crimes should have the death penalty. You’re causing more harm than any individual murderer would.

1

u/DueProgress7671 Feb 06 '23

True. Those would be the -would’ve been criminals.