Yikes.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      91 year ago

      The same should go for corporations. If they do evil, once, they should done.

      You kinda just gutted 99% of corporations. And done overall nothing for society because they already all reopened under different names.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -21 year ago

          I don’t think it’s even legal to give away a company’s assets without their consent, be they criminal or not.

          And anyway, that’s easy to get around that too. Full of companies that already “”“go bankrupt”“” to avoid paying their due and then reopen with money magically appearing from “somewhere”. In the end to me it just seems the more rules/laws you add, the more the average person will suffer because of it while not really causing any for assholes.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              01 year ago

              It’s not just changing the law of a country though, I’m pretty sure some degree of private property is in the Human Rights and would require changing international law. Not to mention it would open a whole another can of worms.

              And by the way, I wasn’t talking about re-investment, more like those CEOs funneling all of their money into some backwards fund or hiding it with fake IDs, You can’t accurately seize assets if those “assets” can be hidden or saved somewhere else. They just pass off as bankrupt, lose their debt and get buck in business with the same money they had before.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  The issue is that it’s a slippery slope. When you start taking human rights away from one group of people, it could very easily lead to innocent people, or entire groups, being framed and legally stripped of their possessions. That’s why I think opening that can of worms is a bad idea.

                  And it’s not that easy. People figured hundreds of ways to hide wealth and there’s no way you can regulate them all. Split it between relatives, buy non-quantifiable assets, hell they could buy bitcoins with multiple proxies on the dark web from an old pc in the middle of Africa and we’d know absolutely nothing of that. Unless you build some sort of utopic database which documents every living person’s possessions and the exchange between them, it’s just not possible.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        That’s why limited liability is bullshit. You make the decisions, you go to prison for the crimes that come of them.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          It’s kind of a gray area though. Do you just jail the CEO if a company does evil? What if it was someone else inside the company and the CEO didn’t know? And conversely, what if the CEO knew and is trying to pass off like they didn’t, how do you prove it? It turns into slippery slopes pretty fast.

          My personal solution would be just to actually scale up the fines. If someone gets fined for something they profited from, it’s extremely stupid for the fine to be less than their profit. You’re basically telling them to do it again.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            I mean, aren’t CEOs massive pay justified because they supposedly take on ultimate responsibility for the company?

            If a company does something criminal under their watch, then even if they didn’t give the orders they have been criminally negligent - surely?

            Now, mind, I don’t think that they should necessarily be the person punished most - the person’s down the chain more responsible should serve more time. But the person at the top shouldn’t get away free.

            Regardless though I agree - fines with teeth are the most important thing.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            I mean, aren’t CEOs massive pay justified because they supposedly take on ultimate responsibility for the company?

            If a company does something criminal under their watch, then even if they didn’t give the orders they have been criminally negligent - surely?

            Now, mind, I don’t think that they should necessarily be the person punished most - the person’s down the chain more responsible should serve more time. But the person at the top shouldn’t get away free.

            Regardless though I agree - fines with teeth are the most important thing.