121–130 of 229 posts
So a company that blatantly cheated will pay some fines and still be worth billions. The founders and early employees will all be rich, or richer than they were when they started. The investors will get a very healthy return. The lesson: break the rules and grow so fast that by the time regulators catch up, you can put on a show of reforming and still keep most of the value that you created. Admirable disruption or h…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's really good. I'd normally just up-vote and move on, but I've gotta ask: Is that original or did that come from somewhere? If the latter -- I'd appreciate a reference because I'd like to read more.
I was thinking of the C.S. Lewis quote from The Abolition of Man: "The head rules the belly through the chest."
Does Conrad's resignation mean forfeiting his own equity?
So a company that blatantly cheated will pay some fines and still be worth billions. The founders and early employees will all be rich, or richer than they were when they started. The investors will get a very healthy return. The lesson: break the rules and grow so fast that by the time regulators catch up, you can put on a show of reforming and still keep most of the value that you created. Admirable disruption or h…
In the mean time, who was harmed?
But just because I don't have particular instances of harm, doesn't mean this isn't an problem. If you let anybody sell health insurance, you end up with con artists selling sham insurance, and by the time you track down the conman, real people are hurt. Sure you can fine the shysters, or maybe even put them in jail (but probably not), but in the meantime, families savings are wiped out to pay the medical bills, or worse, people get sick and die because they can't get treatment.
So a company that blatantly cheated will pay some fines and still be worth billions. The founders and early employees will all be rich, or richer than they were when they started. The investors will get a very healthy return. The lesson: break the rules and grow so fast that by the time regulators catch up, you can put on a show of reforming and still keep most of the value that you created. Admirable disruption or h…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's wrong with putting companies out of business? I understand that it ends up having impacts on people that aren't necessarily involved in the misbehavior, but it provides officers and investors a significant incentive to avoid wrongdoing.
> I understand that it ends up having impacts on people that aren't necessarily involved in the misbehavior, but ... The fact that you understand this could bankrupt and destroy people's lives simply because they worked at the wrong company at the wrong time, but still seek to rationalize it, is more than a little disturbing. Having draconian penalties for line employees is not going to do anything to dissuade a C-le…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the mean time, who was harmed?
The reason you require licensing for insurance sales is because it's very difficult to track all of the individual instances of malfeasance. So, the answer to your question is, "I don't know." But just because I don't have particular instances of harm, doesn't mean this isn't an problem. If you let anybody sell health insurance, you end up with con artists selling sham insurance, and by the time you track down the co…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's wrong with putting companies out of business? I understand that it ends up having impacts on people that aren't necessarily involved in the misbehavior, but it provides officers and investors a significant incentive to avoid wrongdoing.
> I understand that it ends up having impacts on people that aren't necessarily involved in the misbehavior, but ... The fact that you understand this could bankrupt and destroy people's lives simply because they worked at the wrong company at the wrong time, but still seek to rationalize it, is more than a little disturbing. Having draconian penalties for line employees is not going to do anything to dissuade a C-le…