Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

asktrim.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 159 posts

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#31

Post by maxxxxx »

forgetsusername wrote: post #19
tswartz wrote: post #9

I appreciate that Warren didn't let Stumpf talk his way out of taking any responsibility for the actions of his employees and made a clear argument as to why he should be held accountable. Unfortunately, it seems the primary reason he resigned was because the public outrage was loud enough. It seems that until CEOs are personally held accountable via fines or prison (as Warren suggests) we won't see a very big change…

Anyone who has worked in a company of any size knows it'd be down near impossible to know the inner working at all levels of the organization. So, yes, the guy is accountable and needs to lose his job. But the idea that he should go to prison for something like this is ludicrous.

Considering that he makes a lot of money when things go right he should at least pay a lot of money when things go wrong.

The reward structure is a little one-sided:

* Things go well, CEO makes a lot of money and stays.

* Things don't go well, CEO makes a lot of money and leaves.

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#32

Post by maxxxxx »

henrikschroder wrote: post #29
rconti wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prison may be a bit harsh. And in a vacuum, you're right. It would be somewhat unfair to drop the hammer, out of nowhere, on some unsuspecting CEO who just did "business as usual". But that's no excuse; it just means we need to create a culture where this kind of thing becomes increasingly unacceptable, so that in the future executives will know what's expecting of them, and what the consequences can be. The "uninten…

> The CEO can't know what every last person in the organization is doing, but they should be incented to make it their business to a culture in place that doesn't permit this Where I'm from, there's a group af crimes such that if an employee at a company does them, the CEO will absolutely go to jail, even if they knew about it or not. For example, if your company produces toxic sludge as a byproduct, and someone at t…

Personal liability may also be good limiter for size of companies. If something is unmanageable, it should be split up.

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#33

Post by tswartz »

henrikschroder wrote: post #29
rconti wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prison may be a bit harsh. And in a vacuum, you're right. It would be somewhat unfair to drop the hammer, out of nowhere, on some unsuspecting CEO who just did "business as usual". But that's no excuse; it just means we need to create a culture where this kind of thing becomes increasingly unacceptable, so that in the future executives will know what's expecting of them, and what the consequences can be. The "uninten…

> The CEO can't know what every last person in the organization is doing, but they should be incented to make it their business to a culture in place that doesn't permit this Where I'm from, there's a group af crimes such that if an employee at a company does them, the CEO will absolutely go to jail, even if they knew about it or not. For example, if your company produces toxic sludge as a byproduct, and someone at t…

That's super interesting to hear. Can you provide any links to good articles on the topic? This type is reform is something that I think would improve the banking system.

In theory, this keeps CEOs from pleading ignorance as an excuse.

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#34

Post by quantumfoam »

Big whoop. No jail time served. Stumpf stepped down and the criminal enterprise (that remains till this day) was charged with millions that when compared to their profits (in the billions) range, what really was accomplished? The worst thing that happened here was he lost his job but kept a nice severance package and took a vacation. Talk about justice.

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#35

Post by ShellCasing »

What we need is a federal licensing agency for bankers that is similar to the state-by-state licensing agencies for lawyers. That way, when a banker gets caught violating ethical obligations (e.g., defrauding people) he can be disbarred from ever working in finance ever again. Proving an ethical violation is much easier than proving a criminal act.

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#36

Post by dmix »

wheelerwj wrote: post #6
AstroJetson wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its becoming cases of the wheels of justice turn, they turn slowly but they turn. The rate they are turning has become much faster (never --> 3 years is a big speed improvement) and the people that are getting caught in those wheels is a much higher level. 5 years ago clerks, now a CEO.

Then maybe we should ditch the wheels and use Hammers of Justice instead? The ceo PERSONALLY made more money during the scam than entire bank was fined. really epic stuff here, I mean, Really, way to dish out the pain!

The difference is he didn't personally direct people in a criminal way for personal profit. The fact heads didn't role is what is the real issue here. There should have been a strong internal house cleaning after this became known to the top. But they apparently didn't react in a satisfactory way.

This is where the CEO was at fault. He didn't send the right signal that this type of behavior will result in a skewering. And he (and others at the top) deserved to lose their job as a result.

But to claim he was knowingly profiting from some sort of criminal conspiracy is unhelpful hyperbole.

Whether or not the people who created this internal culture and ignored the malicious behavior of thousands should be criminally liable is another issue. But he was certainly separated enough from it where anything beyond a shameful career ending is a bit much.

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#37

Post by adekok »

What do the libertarians say about this theft? While I understand the idea of the free market, I don't see how that would have protected the consumer in this case. The CEO has millions of times the power of the average consumer, and can harness thousands of people to his agenda.

The consumer is left to either (a) pay the "idiot" tax of being stupid enough to sign up for a thieving bank, or (b) rely on the government to protect his best interests.

While I have severe misgivings about the efficiency and corruption of large government, I find it hard to argue that a perfect "free market" would be better for the consumer.

Re: How Elizabeth Warren Took Down the CEO of Wells Fargo, and Why It Matters

#40

Post by enraged_camel »

bsder wrote: post #26
forgetsusername wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone who has worked in a company of any size knows it'd be down near impossible to know the inner working at all levels of the organization. So, yes, the guy is accountable and needs to lose his job. But the idea that he should go to prison for something like this is ludicrous.

> But the idea that he should go to prison for something like this is ludicrous. Fine. Then the company should get the "death penalty" and be liquidated. Especially for something like the banking sector where the federal government could replace a bank almost instantaneously, the "death penalty" should get dropped on companies that engage in malfeasance.

>>Fine. Then the company should get the "death penalty" and be liquidated.

Exactly. After all, corporations are people right? So let's actually treat them like we treat people.

Post reply on HN