I don’t think this is true at all.
10 years of your life is a huge sacrifice, especially in your prime years.
Even among criminals it’s common to abandon everything if it means a chance at avoiding prison. People would rather live on the run and start their lives over under a new identity than go to prison.
I don’t understand these commands suggesting that a decade of prison is a good trade for a few million. Coming out in your 40s or 50s having missed out on your kids’ childhood, lost your social connections, and having no career or experience to point to is devastating. It’s weird to see people look at this and think it’s some sort of good deal.
It isn't that simple. The punishments are actually rather sever for most people. What is different today is the power of extreme wealth to nullify or rationalize harsh punishments. I would say our current system of equal punishment for equal crimes might need to be updated. Punishment could be somehow tied to personal wealth, as speeding tickets in some countries are based on a percentage of one's income. For cases like Holmes', perhaps garnish her income, say 80% of everything over 100k/year, until she has repaid all debtors twice over. (Actually take the money, allow no bankruptcy escapes.)
This whole conversation seems like a slightly advanced game of the old playground favorite, "would you rather?", and I can say that given the right parameters, I would gladly spend some time in prison for the right payout.
That is an interesting outcome of our current wealth inequalities. The amount of money raked in by top earners is so high that it is well worth the risk of a jail term. Most people (ie poor people) would probably happily serve a 10-year jail term if, after that, they had a few million dollars in the bank. Even more so as few fraudsters are ever caught yet alone jailed. It is a rational choice. Our current system of punishments is not adapted to dissuade wrongdoing in the face of such wealth.
And that's just the official system. The unofficial systems such as the inability of convicted felons to get jobs also fail when dealing with rich people. A poor convict will have trouble renting an apartment or getting a loan. Marth Stewart won't ever suffer from being a convicted felon. She will never apply for a job nor have to "rent" an apartment. A hundred years ago she would have been an outcast from high society. No bank would want to give her an account. Not today. Money cures all.