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

HSBC's Money Laundering Scandal (2022)

investopedia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 118 posts

Re: HSBC's Money Laundering Scandal (2022)

#71

Post by abduhl »

delusional wrote: post #48
snozolli wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you make the CEO responsible even though she probably had no idea that this was going on? You send the CEO to prison because they're responsible for what happens under them. CEOs always say they get paid so much because they're the ones bearing ultimate responsibility, so off to jail you go.

The first person who went to prison for the VW emissions scandal was the engineer.

As it should be. The hands that physically commit the crime (or the code) are usually the dirtiest.

Re: HSBC's Money Laundering Scandal (2022)

#72

Post by jamhan »

ttctciyf wrote: post #26

According to a Guardian article[1] from 2012, when HSBC copped its $1.9bn settlement for what appears to be its knowing involvement in narco-terrorism, the bank duly expressed contrition and consented to "install an independent monitor to assess reformed internal controls." The monitoring was part of a five year "deferred prosecution agreement" with the DoJ which allowed to bank to avoid actual criminal prosecution a…

Linked from Nicolas Wilson's twitter, this video, about a Tory MP and her husband's stealing of GBP 203m of Government money for useless PPE at the beginning of the COVID crisis, is staggering:

https://twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1621174752407851008

Edit: Here's the video on YouTube: https://youtu.be/Bkshh4jOzME

Re: HSBC's Money Laundering Scandal (2022)

#73

Post by ttctciyf »

jamhan wrote: post #72
ttctciyf wrote: post #26

According to a Guardian article[1] from 2012, when HSBC copped its $1.9bn settlement for what appears to be its knowing involvement in narco-terrorism, the bank duly expressed contrition and consented to "install an independent monitor to assess reformed internal controls." The monitoring was part of a five year "deferred prosecution agreement" with the DoJ which allowed to bank to avoid actual criminal prosecution a…

Linked from Nicolas Wilson's twitter, this video, about a Tory MP and her husband's stealing of GBP 203m of Government money for useless PPE at the beginning of the COVID crisis, is staggering: https://twitter.com/ByDonkeys/status/1621174752407851008 Edit: Here's the video on YouTube: https://youtu.be/Bkshh4jOzME

Tory peer, but yes!

Re: HSBC's Money Laundering Scandal (2022)

#74

Post by snozolli »

abduhl wrote: post #71
delusional wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first person who went to prison for the VW emissions scandal was the engineer.

As it should be. The hands that physically commit the crime (or the code) are usually the dirtiest.

Ah, yes, giving management that sweet plausible deniability.

Just create an impossible demand on your workers and then act surprised when they employ unethical practices to meet those demands. Just like Wells Fargo.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wells_Fargo_cross-selling_sc...

Re: HSBC's Money Laundering Scandal (2022)

#76

Post by abduhl »

snozolli wrote: post #74
abduhl wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As it should be. The hands that physically commit the crime (or the code) are usually the dirtiest.

Ah, yes, giving management that sweet plausible deniability. Just create an impossible demand on your workers and then act surprised when they employ unethical practices to meet those demands. Just like Wells Fargo. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wells_Fargo_cross-selling_sc...

That isn’t what I said. I said that the person who commits the crime should be the first one to go to jail. That implies others should follow.

Re: HSBC's Money Laundering Scandal (2022)

#77

Post by jasonwatkinspdx »

vishnugupta wrote: post #67
bastawhiz wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you answered the question. If I facilitate a drug cartel moving kilograms of cocaine, I'll be in jail until I'm very old. If a bank knowingly facilitates the same outcome through different means, why doesn't anyone at the bank face the same charges? What you're saying is that even though money laundering is necessary for drug cartel operations, it shouldn't be a crime (or should be a much lesser crime).…

You bring up a fascinating aspect of money which I like to contemplate about often. Money is the pure abstraction in the sense that it hides just about everything that brought it into existence. If I look at two $100 bills they are exactly the same; theoretically and practically. And yet they couldn't possibly be similar, they could have originated in crimes, be parts of legitimate businesses, so on and so forth. But…

I think you'd find David Graeber's book Debt very interesting. There are a bunch of common assumptions about how money came into existence that simply aren't what happened based on the archeological record.

Coinage came a lot later than basic debt ledgers, and it was largely an organizational hack by rulers to feed and house their armies. They'd mint coins with their face as seal or whatever, and would issue these to the soldiers as payment, while also requiring all citizens to pay a tax in those same coins. Suddenly everyone is figuring out how to give the soldiers what they want without you having to organize any of it directly.

Re: HSBC's Money Laundering Scandal (2022)

#78

Post by jasonwatkinspdx »

photochemsyn wrote: post #18

Why aren't bankers who launder billions for drug cartels given the kind of multi-decade federal prison sentences that 25-yr-old kids smuggling a few kilos of cocaine from Mexico to the United State are? It certainly makes it look like outfits like the FBI and DEA are little more than the enforcement arms of an organized white-collar crime cartel operating out of Wall Street offices, doesn't it? Amusingly James Comey…

Banking has achieved de facto regulatory capture. We see the same patterns over and over again of the consequences of high risk systemic behavior being born by taxpayers, but it's business as usual for everything continuing the status quo. Unless voters start creating pain at the ballot box, it'll just continue.

There's also unfortunately some practical issues with prosecuting finance crimes. The cases are long and difficult to articulate to a jury. The SEC, IRS, etc have limited resources by design of congress, and so prioritize slam dunk cases and plea deals. The exception seems to be if enough big investors get scammed.

Re: HSBC's Money Laundering Scandal (2022)

#80

Post by justinclift »

abduhl wrote: post #76
snozolli wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, yes, giving management that sweet plausible deniability. Just create an impossible demand on your workers and then act surprised when they employ unethical practices to meet those demands. Just like Wells Fargo. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wells_Fargo_cross-selling_sc...

That isn’t what I said. I said that the person who commits the crime should be the first one to go to jail. That implies others should follow.

Often times, the crime that's committed is because the boss told them to do it, then threatened the engineer when they initially said No.
Post reply on HN