Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

User avatar
Ellie
Posts: 12388
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 18:34

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Ellie » 22 Aug 2018, 10:22

Andrew wrote:
22 Aug 2018, 10:03
Pham Nuwen wrote:
22 Aug 2018, 09:33
Let me choose a topic and tie it to rape in some way, shape, or form. Can't argue with a rape tie in. You arguing against rape? Why do you like to rape so much? /jen
"Rape, murder, arson, and rape."

"You said rape twice."

"I like rape."
If that character had a name we could name the Rape Godwin after him. Damn Mel Brooks and his lack of foresight!
"2019 has got to stop injecting dmt straight in the dick hole." - dhex

User avatar
Pham Nuwen
Posts: 7827
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 02:17

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Pham Nuwen » 22 Aug 2018, 12:40

Check the credits, Ellie! You are our only hope!
Goddamn libertarian message board. Hugh Akston

leave me to my mescaline smoothie in peace, please. dhex

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 26644
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Warren » 22 Aug 2018, 12:51

I assume she did that before posting
I think in terms of credibility and it's all black eyes as far as you can see in the media landscape. - JasonL

User avatar
Ellie
Posts: 12388
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 18:34

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Ellie » 22 Aug 2018, 12:56

Yeah, IMDB lists a ton of uncredited desperados (desperadoes?) and whatnot but I don't know which one he is.
"2019 has got to stop injecting dmt straight in the dick hole." - dhex

User avatar
Andrew
Posts: 6640
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 21:52
Location: Vale of Eternal Fire

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Andrew » 22 Aug 2018, 13:15

Ellie wrote:
22 Aug 2018, 12:56
Yeah, IMDB lists a ton of uncredited desperados (desperadoes?) and whatnot but I don't know which one he is.
I would assume he's the rapey one. Like the eighth dwarf no one likes to talk about.
We live in the fucked age. Get used to it. - dhex

The sun only shines when a woman is being sexually abused. - Warren

User avatar
Ellie
Posts: 12388
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 18:34

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Ellie » 22 Aug 2018, 14:02

So we should call this Godwin the Rapey Desperado? :D :D :D
"2019 has got to stop injecting dmt straight in the dick hole." - dhex

User avatar
Pham Nuwen
Posts: 7827
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 02:17

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Pham Nuwen » 22 Aug 2018, 14:21

Im thinking more along the lines of snl. Therapists/The rapists.
Goddamn libertarian message board. Hugh Akston

leave me to my mescaline smoothie in peace, please. dhex

User avatar
Ellie
Posts: 12388
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 18:34

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Ellie » 22 Aug 2018, 14:27

Therapy Desperado :D :D :D
"2019 has got to stop injecting dmt straight in the dick hole." - dhex

User avatar
Pham Nuwen
Posts: 7827
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 02:17

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Pham Nuwen » 22 Aug 2018, 16:44

"I'm not trying to therapy desperado the thread but ..."

Yeah. That works. Better run it by Nicole first just to make sure.
Goddamn libertarian message board. Hugh Akston

leave me to my mescaline smoothie in peace, please. dhex

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 7070
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Jadagul » 22 Aug 2018, 18:28

JasonL wrote:
22 Aug 2018, 09:21
I have no objections to seeking higher rates of enforcement on white collar crimes that are currently crimes. I don't know that I follow what you want to happen wrt corporate crimes since it sounds like you don't think fines are effective but also acknowledge it doesn't always make sense to put specific people in jail for these.

Regarding incidence down to nearly zero - you'd probably acknowledge the costs- social and otherwise - of doing that in any other crime would get you on the other side of diminished returns well before you got there.
I was making the point that corporate crimes are different in two ways:

1. corporations are far more likely to think of getting caught and convicted as non-catastrophic. Like, for most people, "getting convicted of a felony" is one of the worst things that can happen to them. For corporations, everything is cash and you can trade it back and forth. So a corporation can say "sure, we'll get caught and convicted a third of the time we do this, but it's worth it on net", in a way that individuals mostly won't.

2. Corporations are also doing numerical cost-benefit analysis. So doubling the severity of the punishment is way more likely to have an effect on corporate decision-making than it is on individual decision-making.

The speculative conclusion is that increasing punishment severity is likely to have a real effect on deterrence for corporate crimes, in a way it doesn't really for individual crimes.

As for your last point---yeah, driving incidence down to zero is probably more expensive than it's worth. The thing the past few years have mostly convinced me of is that we're nowhere near that point on the tradeoff curve.

User avatar
Pham Nuwen
Posts: 7827
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 02:17

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Pham Nuwen » 22 Aug 2018, 18:49

Jadagul. Could you rewrite that into some sort of rape analogy? I'm sure I would understand it better and be swayed to your point if view.
Goddamn libertarian message board. Hugh Akston

leave me to my mescaline smoothie in peace, please. dhex

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 24215
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Jennifer » 22 Aug 2018, 23:26

Jadagul wrote:
22 Aug 2018, 18:28

1. corporations are far more likely to think of getting caught and convicted as non-catastrophic. Like, for most people, "getting convicted of a felony" is one of the worst things that can happen to them. For corporations, everything is cash and you can trade it back and forth. So a corporation can say "sure, we'll get caught and convicted a third of the time we do this, but it's worth it on net", in a way that individuals mostly won't.
That's a more concise way of expressing the point I tried to: any individual who did was Wells Fargo or GM did would have his life irrevocably ruined, yet companies which do such things are still humming along just fine.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 15860
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Aresen » 22 Aug 2018, 23:34

Pham Nuwen wrote:
22 Aug 2018, 18:49
Jadagul. Could you rewrite that into some sort of rape analogy? I'm sure I would understand it better and be swayed to your point if view.
Bad Pham. Bad, bad Pham. :lol:
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex

User avatar
Dangerman
Posts: 6681
Joined: 07 May 2010, 12:26

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Dangerman » 23 Aug 2018, 12:59


User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 17292
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by lunchstealer » 23 Aug 2018, 14:40

What'd GM do? Or was it just the bankruptcy/bailout.

Does Trump count as an individual for comparison-to-GM-bailout purposes?
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"We can't confirm rumors that Lynndie England is in the running to be Gina Haspel's personal aide." - DAR

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 24215
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Jennifer » 23 Aug 2018, 14:52

lunchstealer wrote:
23 Aug 2018, 14:40
What'd GM do?
Spent over a decade knowingly selling cars with faulty ignition switches, which ultimately killed over 120 people and injured hundreds more. Also let at least one innocent victim take the fall for their crimes: her Saturn got into an accident (caused by faulty switch), killed her fiance/passenger, she ended up charged with a crime (either criminally negligent homicide or vehicular manslaughter, something like that) ... all while GM said nothing, and kept right on selling those cars. I can't think of any ordinary individual, or conspiracy of ordinary individuals, who could cause that much harm and get off with that light of a penalty. (My apologies to anyone here who gets upset at the implicit comparison of "an auto manufacturer" to "a mass murderer.")
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 15860
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Aresen » 23 Aug 2018, 16:36

Jennifer wrote:
23 Aug 2018, 14:52
lunchstealer wrote:
23 Aug 2018, 14:40
What'd GM do?
Spent over a decade knowingly selling cars with faulty ignition switches, which ultimately killed over 120 people and injured hundreds more. Also let at least one innocent victim take the fall for their crimes: her Saturn got into an accident (caused by faulty switch), killed her fiance/passenger, she ended up charged with a crime (either criminally negligent homicide or vehicular manslaughter, something like that) ... all while GM said nothing, and kept right on selling those cars. I can't think of any ordinary individual, or conspiracy of ordinary individuals, who could cause that much harm and get off with that light of a penalty. (My apologies to anyone here who gets upset at the implicit comparison of "an auto manufacturer" to "a mass murderer.")
First of all, GM eventually did pay some compensation:
The Infallible Wikipedia wrote:On September 17 2015, General Motors entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement with the United States Department of Justice, in which GM admitted that "from in or about the spring of 2012 through in or about February 2014, GM failed to disclose a deadly safety defect to its U.S. regulator... It also falsely represented to consumers that vehicles containing the defect posed no safety concern."[5] As part of the Deferred Prosecution Agreement, GM agreed to forfeit $900 million to the United States.[5][49] GM gave $600 million in compensation to surviving victims of accidents caused by faulty ignition switches.
Whether this was adequate penalty or not, I cannot say. [Although I fail to see why the Federal Government should get a bigger cut than the victims.] There is also ongoing litigation with regard to the deaths. I can find no reference to any individual who was charged with malfeasance in regard to the defective switch, nor do there appear to have been any whistleblowers from within GM.

Second: Should the company have been put out of business, as would seem to be the purpose of Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act?" I will point out that libertarians were all for letting GM die when TARP was being discussed. Let's see where Elizabeth Warren stood on TARP. She wasn't in the Senate, but:
The Infallible Wikipedia wrote:On November 14, 2008, Warren was appointed by U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to chair the five-member Congressional Oversight Panel created to oversee the implementation of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act.[51] The Panel released monthly oversight reports evaluating the government bailout and related programs.[52] During Warren's tenure, these reports covered foreclosure mitigation; consumer and small business lending; commercial real estate; AIG; bank stress tests; the impact of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) on the financial markets; government guarantees; the automotive industry; and other topics.

Hmm. Seems Elizabeth Warren actually helped keep it alive. Also, that darling of Consumer Protection, Chuck Schumer, voted for TARP.

Since the ignition switch issue did not come to light until 2012, it is possible that Elizabeth Warren's position might have been different had she known. However, the main point is that politicians voted to keep alive a company that deserved to die. I maintain they always will when those companies they prefer are at risk. The "Accountable Capitalism Act" will not change that. Instead, it will be used as another tool to favor one company over another. I would not be surprised if, after it has been around for 20 years, it is used in the same way that Russian Kleptocrats use the FSB and Russian Tax Law to steal the assets of viable companies.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 24215
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Jennifer » 23 Aug 2018, 16:48

Aresen wrote:
23 Aug 2018, 16:36
Jennifer wrote:
23 Aug 2018, 14:52
lunchstealer wrote:
23 Aug 2018, 14:40
What'd GM do?
Spent over a decade knowingly selling cars with faulty ignition switches, which ultimately killed over 120 people and injured hundreds more. Also let at least one innocent victim take the fall for their crimes: her Saturn got into an accident (caused by faulty switch), killed her fiance/passenger, she ended up charged with a crime (either criminally negligent homicide or vehicular manslaughter, something like that) ... all while GM said nothing, and kept right on selling those cars. I can't think of any ordinary individual, or conspiracy of ordinary individuals, who could cause that much harm and get off with that light of a penalty. (My apologies to anyone here who gets upset at the implicit comparison of "an auto manufacturer" to "a mass murderer.")
First of all, GM eventually did pay some compensation
I know they paid compensation, which I referenced multiple times upthread: a whopping six-tenths of one percent of their net worth. If you know of any individuals or groups of non-incorporated conspiring individuals who get that light of a penalty for causing that level of harm, I would be interested to learn who they are. Where "percentage of net worth" is concerned, I paid a vastly higher penalty for running a yellow light in college--and nobody even got hurt by what I did.
Second: Should the company have been put out of business, as would seem to be the purpose of Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act?"
One could just as easily ask "Should a company that kills so many people and lets innocent victims take the fall for them stay in business, and why?"

TRIGGER WARNING: Mention of slavery

Upthread I mentioned slavery (and support thereof) as a historical example of people saying "Look, the health of our economy requires us to allow such things to continue." Which was true so far as that went, but I lean more toward the POV "If your economy requires such things, best you change your economy so that it does not."
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Ellie
Posts: 12388
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 18:34

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Ellie » 23 Aug 2018, 17:10

I don't think anyone here or elsewhere is pointing to corporations committing crimes and saying "The health of our economy requires us to allow such CRIMES to continue;" they are saying, "The health of our economy requires us to allow such CORPORATIONS to continue DOING BUSINESS while they are paying the penalties for their crimes."

If we're going to use your analogy, Elizabeth Warren is saying we should be able to punish slaveholders with the death penalty, and people are saying "Uhh, if we murder all the landowners and farmers that's going to hurt the region's economy" and you're saying "Why do you love slavery so much?????"
"2019 has got to stop injecting dmt straight in the dick hole." - dhex

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 15860
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Aresen » 23 Aug 2018, 17:18

Jennifer wrote:
23 Aug 2018, 16:48
I know they paid compensation, which I referenced multiple times upthread: a whopping six-tenths of one percent of their net worth. If you know of any individuals or groups of non-incorporated conspiring individuals who get that light of a penalty for causing that level of harm, I would be interested to learn who they are. Where "percentage of net worth" is concerned, I paid a vastly higher penalty for running a yellow light in college--and nobody even got hurt by what I did.
Are you arguing that compensation of victims should depend on how deep the defendant's pockets are? The issue is whether the compensation was adequate, not how much it harms the perpetrator. The libertarian principle is restitution, not vengeance.
Second: Should the company have been put out of business, as would seem to be the purpose of Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act?"
One could just as easily ask "Should a company that kills so many people and lets innocent victims take the fall stay in business, and why?"

TRIGGER WARNING: Mention of slavery

Upthread I mentioned slavery (and support thereof) as a historical example of people saying "Look, the health of our economy requires us to allow such things to continue." Which was true so far as that went, but I lean more toward the POV "If your economy requires such things, best you change your economy so that it does not."
I fail to see the difference between the two questions. My point was that politicians will act to protect favored companies.

As for the company itself: If it makes a useful product, others can take its place or, alternatively, the corrupt management can be replaced. (Which is something that corporate restructurings tend not to do, thanks to the way the US Bankruptcy code is written.) Ultimately, it is individuals who made those decisions and created the corporate culture. Those individuals should be held responsible in the same way we have argued in this forum that corrupt cops, prosecutors and judges should pay the penalties of their illegal actions rather than the taxpayers. [I have to equivocate here a bit in the sense that the employers should also pay a price - the corporations hired the executives who did the crimes in the same way the cities and states which hired the corrupt cops.]
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 24215
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Jennifer » 23 Aug 2018, 17:27

Ellie wrote:
23 Aug 2018, 17:10
I don't think anyone here or elsewhere is pointing to corporations committing crimes and saying "The health of our economy requires us to allow such CRIMES to continue;" they are saying, "The health of our economy requires us to allow such CORPORATIONS to continue DOING BUSINESS while they are paying the penalties for their crimes."
Specifically, continue staying in business while they are paying the insultingly miniscule penalties for their crimes.

Again, if you or anyone else can find examples of individuals still allowed to freely live their lives after having caused such monumental levels of harm to others, I would be very interested to read about them.
If we're going to use your analogy, Elizabeth Warren is saying we should be able to punish slaveholders with the death penalty
If your analogy assumes that slavery has already been outlawed (at least for ordinary people), yet companies continue owning slaves and profiting from their forced labor-- yeah, I have no problem at all with the suggestion "A company who commits such crimes should face penalties as harsh as individuals who commit such crimes." I definitely oppose any status quo which says "Individuals who still own slaves face legal consequences harsh enough to ruin their lives -- but companies who still own slaves face fines minor enough that they can view them as merely the cost of doing business."

EDIT: Typos
Last edited by Jennifer on 23 Aug 2018, 17:41, edited 1 time in total.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 24215
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Jennifer » 23 Aug 2018, 17:30

Aresen wrote:
23 Aug 2018, 17:18
Jennifer wrote:
23 Aug 2018, 16:48
I know they paid compensation, which I referenced multiple times upthread: a whopping six-tenths of one percent of their net worth. If you know of any individuals or groups of non-incorporated conspiring individuals who get that light of a penalty for causing that level of harm, I would be interested to learn who they are. Where "percentage of net worth" is concerned, I paid a vastly higher penalty for running a yellow light in college--and nobody even got hurt by what I did.
Are you arguing that compensation of victims should depend on how deep the defendant's pockets are?
No, but I'm saying defendants with deep pockets shouldn't be effectively immune from punishment for their crimes.

As Jadagul said upthread: "corporations are far more likely to think of getting caught and convicted as non-catastrophic. Like, for most people, "getting convicted of a felony" is one of the worst things that can happen to them. For corporations, everything is cash and you can trade it back and forth. So a corporation can say "sure, we'll get caught and convicted a third of the time we do this, but it's worth it on net", in a way that individuals mostly won't."
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Highway
Posts: 13269
Joined: 12 May 2011, 00:22
Location: the Electric Ocean

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Highway » 23 Aug 2018, 17:41

They weren't immune. They paid a settlement to the victims that at least someone thought was fair compensation. They additionally paid punitive damages to the goverment of 150% of that. And if you want to talk about % of customers harmed, GM sold something like 5 million cars per year *each* year. ~400 people have claimed injury or death from it. 5 model years at 5 million each year, 25 million vehicles. So 0.0016% of their customers were injured or killed by that issue.

It's a completely serious issue, and where I think the MOST blame lays with GM is that they covered it up, changed the part illegally (they put out the revised part under the same item number), and then lied about it. But it's a huge company with huge output and huge exposure. They were hit with a penalty that the courts felt commensurate to the offense. Yes, that would ruin an individual. But it's certainly not immunity.
"Sharks do not go around challenging people to games of chance like dojo breakers."

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 24215
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Jennifer » 23 Aug 2018, 17:49

Highway wrote:
23 Aug 2018, 17:41
They weren't immune. They paid a settlement to the victims that at least someone thought was fair compensation.
Yes, "someone" thought it was fair compensation. Presumably "someone" thought every egregious-ruling example previously mentioned in this thread was fair -- while other "someones" say it's an outrage.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 26644
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Elizabeth Warren's "Accountable Capitalism Act"

Post by Warren » 23 Aug 2018, 17:58

Ellie wrote:
23 Aug 2018, 17:10
I don't think anyone here or elsewhere is pointing to corporations committing crimes and saying "The health of our economy requires us to allow such CRIMES to continue;" they are saying, "The health of our economy requires us to allow such CORPORATIONS to continue DOING BUSINESS while they are paying the penalties for their crimes."

If we're going to use your analogy, Elizabeth Warren is saying we should be able to punish slaveholders with the death penalty, and people are saying "Uhh, if we murder all the landowners and farmers that's going to hurt the region's economy" and you're saying "Why do you love slavery so much?????"
I'd say it's a matter of the cure being worse than the disease. Corporate malfeasance is a problem we could be doing better at dealing with. Yet, however bad things are, they're not nearly as bad as they could be, and the Accountable Capitalism Act is out of the pan and into the fire.
I think in terms of credibility and it's all black eyes as far as you can see in the media landscape. - JasonL

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests