It's about time white collar crimes are taken as seriously as other crimes. If you break into someone's home and steal $10,000, no one bats an eye over imprisonment. But if you steal $100,000 from taxpayers, you suddenly become a lot more sympathetic.

I wonder to what extent this is because burglary is committed by people who are poor and not well educated, whereas white collar crimes are committed by people who look just like your friends and colleagues.

For burglary it could also just be fear and risk of violence. If someone is willing to forcefully break into a house, they are probably willing to harm the owner if they happen to be home. A better example would be to compare white collar crime to shoplifting as neither of those crimes has the same undertones of violence to them.

>It's about time white collar crimes are taken as seriously as other crimes. If you break into someone's home and steal $10,000, no one bats an eye over imprisonment. But if you steal $100,000 from taxpayers, you suddenly become a lot more sympathetic.

Breaking into a home is a violent crime whereas white collar crime is nonviolent. You can often return property, you cannot make someone un-experience a burglary. Don't get me wrong (i.e. "I know that if I don't include this disclaimer someone will try to) white collar crime and corruption like this should certainly be prosecuted but there's a reason we generally don't punish it as severely as violent crime since we generally consider property less valuable than life and health.

Exactly. Almost anyone would much prefer to lose $100 to a scammer than someone who breaks into your home and takes it. The latter is far more violating and scary.

> I wonder to what extent this is because burglary is committed by people who are poor and not well educated, whereas white collar crimes are committed by people who look just like your friends and colleagues.

Not much since poor people who are friends and colleagues to other poor people also make the same judgements.

It's hard to fight the biggest cheaters, because they have lots of money and can afford lawyers. When big tech companies and billionaires get to avoid taxes with stuff like tax loopholes and offshore nonsense, you have a lot of sympathy for the smaller guy stealing a measly 100K.

just what is it with these sensational headlines in hackernews these days? recently skipped over an iphone location services issue one as well. come on guys.

Sounds like the premise of the Korean movie "Parasite". Great movie!

Lying !== Fraud.

Not all lying in all circumstances is fraud, but the legal definition of fraud is essentially "intentionally lying to obtain a benefit at the expense of someone" in a bit more precise words, so at least this case of lying on her resume matches the definition of fraud.

The precise words are different for each jurisdiction, for example, the South Australia criminal law (https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/CRIMINAL%20LAW%20CO...) says "139—Deception; A person who deceives another and, by doing so— (a)dishonestly benefits him/herself or a third person; or (b) dishonestly causes a detriment to the person subjected to the deception or a third person, is guilty of an offence." - in essence, all lying to get a benefit or harm someone else; though they've chosen to label that particular crime 'deception' instead of 'fraud' as in many other places.

That maybe true, but I am assuming that you are looking at it from a non Australian position. (If not I apologize). It could be there are laws there that say it is fraudulent to obtain a public office position by overstating your qualifications.

No, but all fraud includes lying

Correct. This was what I was attempting to convey (but failed miserably) with the "!==" instead of "!=". Thus, one could be misleading by categorizing fraud as lying, which is exactly what's going on with this title.

It's especially egregious in this instances as most everyone lies, at least a little, on their resumes because often it's the only way to get pasted HR filter BS.