Backpage Raided, CEO Arrested on Sex-Trafficking Charges

Post by jmulho » Fri, Oct 07, 2016, 12:48 PM UTC

Buge wrote: post #82

1024core wrote: post #21

Why is it that in such cases, the government reaches for the CEO right away; but when Wells Fargo employees open millions of fraudulent accounts, it's not the CEO's fault? If I were to commit identity theft (which is basically what the WF employees did), then I would be facing jail time; why hasn't anyone in WF been charged with criminal fraud yet? Why not the CEO?

99% of Wells Fargo's income was not coming from these fake accounts.

Post by empthought » Fri, Oct 07, 2016, 12:55 PM UTC

vertex-four wrote: post #145

empthought wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the sleazy slimeballs in the anti-trafficking movement Defending pimps and johns while calling anti-prostitution activists "sleazy slimeballs." I love it.

Am I correct in interpreting that as you suggesting that anti-prostitution activists did not, in fact, claim that Amnesty International were making things up when they pointed out the negative outcomes of "the Nordic model" for sex workers, the people you're claiming it was supposed to protect?

Post by Esau » Fri, Oct 07, 2016, 1:03 PM UTC

dzdt wrote: post #91

1024core wrote: post #21

Why is it that in such cases, the government reaches for the CEO right away; but when Wells Fargo employees open millions of fraudulent accounts, it's not the CEO's fault? If I were to commit identity theft (which is basically what the WF employees did), then I would be facing jail time; why hasn't anyone in WF been charged with criminal fraud yet? Why not the CEO?

I think Matt Levine's take on this is right on: https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-09-09/wells-far... . Senior management wanted employees to do REAL cross-selling to make money, but the metrics were set so high that employees turned to fake accounts to meet the standard. The fake accounts did not benefit the bank in any substantial way: So that's about 2.1 million fake deposit and credit-card accounts, of…

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Oct 07, 2016, 1:04 PM UTC

oarsinsync wrote: post #110

barrkel wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If selling fruit was the shopkeeper's free choice, they would not need to be paid for fruit. This sentence has structurally the same form. If you think it's ridiculous, it can only be because you think there is something special about sex - i.e. it is sacred in some way. And thus your position actually doesn't relate to free will. I think you're very confused. Your statements aren't logically consistent and I have to…

> This sentence has structurally the same form. If you think it's ridiculous, it can only be because you think there is something special about sex > As Dworkin wrote a long time ago, "in prostitution, no woman stays whole. It is impossible to use a human body in the way women's bodies are used in prostitution and to have a whole human being at the end of it, or in the middle of it, or close to the beginning of it. I…

Post by empthought » Fri, Oct 07, 2016, 1:11 PM UTC

Quarrelsome wrote: post #100

empthought wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have a perfectly good approach already; it's called the Nordic model. Arrest johns, not prostitutes. And there are thousands of former sex workers that will give you an earful about what you think you know about prostitution and what prostitutes think.

Every model has trade-offs, the trade-off of the Nordic model is that clients are less willing to disclose information which makes it more difficult for sex workers to weed out violent troublemakers. Implementing the Nordic model would in some cases undo some recent advances in identifying and blocking these ugly clients and result in some workers being violently abused or even possibly killed. Don't go thinking ther…