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

Walmart Pleads Guilty After a Decade of Bribes

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 214 posts

Re: Walmart Pleads Guilty After a Decade of Bribes

#61

Post by rayiner »

I suspect people cynically demanding that CEOs be put in jail haven’t really dug into the facts of this or other FCPA cases. Holding the CEO liable for employee misdeeds is like holding teachers responsible for teenagers getting into fights or having sex. It’s a strong moral position to take (holding teachers accountable), but it’s wholly impractical and unfair.

In a company with a million employees, it’s guaranteed that hundreds if not thousands are doing things that are illegal. That’s just statistics applied to human nature. When the company is multi-national the problem is worse. Conduct like bribery or tax evasion that is condemned in the US is socially accepted in many other countries. When some store manager in Mexico bribes an inspector, the CEO of Wal-Mart has absolutely no idea that it happened. You can probably go several layers down before you find someone who knew.

The touchstone of criminal law is a guilty mind. When someone’s conduct is mharmful, we hold them liable for monetary damages. But only where there is personal moral culpability do we impose criminal sanctions. It’s the difference between wrongful death and murder. Ordinary negligence, and criminal negligence. This is an easy, bright line rule, and shouldn’t be compromised for anything.

Re: Walmart Pleads Guilty After a Decade of Bribes

#62

Post by ghufran_syed »

pmiller2 wrote: post #34
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can't jail Walmart, but we should be able to jail its CEO. Perhaps if being CEO meant taking the risk of jail for the corporation's misdeeds, the job would actually be worth the ridiculous salary it pays out, and provide a much stronger incentive for the CEO to police illegal conduct internally.

Why not the entire C-suite and the board? Then you’d get some real accountability.

Why not every shareholder? Or every shopper too?

Re: Walmart Pleads Guilty After a Decade of Bribes

#63

Post by brianpgordon »

eindiran wrote: post #16
googlemike wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How should one interpret it then?

From the Wikipedia page: "Although the decision does not address "corporate personhood," a long-established judicial and constitutional concept, much attention has focused on that issue."[0] "How should one interpret [the case] then?" Recognize that Citizen's United is _not_ about corporate personhood, and actually read what the case was about. The number of times I've heard people making snarky remarks about Citizen…

OK, but the whole argument rests entirely on corporate personhood. Without it, the 1st amendment isn't even in play.

Re: Walmart Pleads Guilty After a Decade of Bribes

#64

Post by rayiner »

brianpgordon wrote: post #63
eindiran wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the Wikipedia page: "Although the decision does not address "corporate personhood," a long-established judicial and constitutional concept, much attention has focused on that issue."[0] "How should one interpret [the case] then?" Recognize that Citizen's United is _not_ about corporate personhood, and actually read what the case was about. The number of times I've heard people making snarky remarks about Citizen…

OK, but the whole argument rests entirely on corporate personhood. Without it, the 1st amendment isn't even in play.

You’ve got it backward. It was the law that tried to use corporate personhood to subvert the first amendment. What Citizens United said is that you can’t deny groups of people their first amendment rights just because they’re acting through a corporation.

Re: Walmart Pleads Guilty After a Decade of Bribes

#65

Post by ghufran_syed »

nerdponx wrote: post #27
jammygit wrote: post #7

Is 280M just a speeding ticket? I wonder if they are met ahead or behind because of the policy.

It's just a speeding ticket. They are ahead.

It's 3.67% of that number - if you were a software engineer making $100,000 / year in the US, it would be like paying a speeding ticket of $3670, which is an order of magnitude greater than most speeding tickets in the US

Re: Walmart Pleads Guilty After a Decade of Bribes

#66

Post by pmiller2 »

rayiner wrote: post #61

I suspect people cynically demanding that CEOs be put in jail haven’t really dug into the facts of this or other FCPA cases. Holding the CEO liable for employee misdeeds is like holding teachers responsible for teenagers getting into fights or having sex. It’s a strong moral position to take (holding teachers accountable), but it’s wholly impractical and unfair. In a company with a million employees, it’s guaranteed…

How do you hold an immortal, amoral entity that can’t be thrown in jail accountable, then? Trivial fines amounting to 0.1% of EBITDA are not the answer.

Re: Walmart Pleads Guilty After a Decade of Bribes

#67

Post by [deleted] »

geofft wrote: post #35
c3534l wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Human beings are allowed to organize for the purposes of political action and whether or not they decide to form a corporation doesn't matter because "corporation" isn't a constitutional concept. Further, "personhood" means you can sue the corporation, it can hold property, etc. Lawyers usual call "corporate personhood" "legal entity."

> Human beings are allowed to organize for the purposes of political action and whether or not they decide to form a corporation doesn't matter because "corporation" isn't a constitutional concept Sure it does - if I am killed by a natural person due to negligence, the state can imprison the person who killed me. If I am killed by a corporation due to negligence, the state generally does not imprison any individual,…

[deleted]

Re: Walmart Pleads Guilty After a Decade of Bribes

#68

Post by arcboii92 »

ghufran_syed wrote: post #62
pmiller2 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not the entire C-suite and the board? Then you’d get some real accountability.

Why not every shareholder? Or every shopper too?

Or at the very least, every person who has ever shopped at Walmart has to now spend their first turn of Monopoly in jail. THEN we'll see real change.

Re: Walmart Pleads Guilty After a Decade of Bribes

#69

Post by drivingmenuts »

StillBored wrote: post #18

So, now its the US governments chance to hold out its hand. These are so trivial for a company like Walmart, and no-one is being individually held responsible. So it just looks like an official bit of us gov bribery, just like the fee's to avoid the security line at the airport. Cloak it in a bit of legal mumble jumbo and the us government gets its payout too. Frankly though too, these foreign anti-bribery laws seem…

What comprises the “mind” of a corporation? I would argue that the board and senior officers make up that mind and it’s their failure to demand or instill strong ethics allowed for these crimes to occur.

Re: Walmart Pleads Guilty After a Decade of Bribes

#70

Post by AndrewDavis »

pmiller2 wrote: post #66
rayiner wrote: post #61

I suspect people cynically demanding that CEOs be put in jail haven’t really dug into the facts of this or other FCPA cases. Holding the CEO liable for employee misdeeds is like holding teachers responsible for teenagers getting into fights or having sex. It’s a strong moral position to take (holding teachers accountable), but it’s wholly impractical and unfair. In a company with a million employees, it’s guaranteed…

How do you hold an immortal, amoral entity that can’t be thrown in jail accountable, then? Trivial fines amounting to 0.1% of EBITDA are not the answer.

You increase the fines to the point it becomes a fiduciary requirement to behave properly.

If fines are low, companies will continue to behave poorly because it may be profitable to do so.

Post reply on HN