Re:FTX's Sam Bankman-Fried Should Serve 40 to 50 Years in Pr...
by bigyikes on Friday March 15, 2024 @04:18PM
(#39720260)
It’s a good question that seems to hit the same chord as the death penalty argument.
I don’t hold this view, but I think the answer is: the goal is punishment, not deterrence, nor rehabilitation. People want “justice” which, in their view, can only be served via harsh punishment.
Re:FTX's Sam Bankman-Fried Should Serve 40 to 50 Years in Pr...
by throwaway74432 on Friday March 15, 2024 @04:17PM
(#39720246)
>20 years is as much a deterrent as 50 years, but at a lower cost to the tax payer.
The number of wealthy people getting those kinds of sentences is basically 0, so the cost to the taxpayer is a moot point.
Re:FTX's Sam Bankman-Fried Should Serve 40 to 50 Years in Pr...
by anigbrowl on Friday March 15, 2024 @05:18PM
(#39720823)
but let's say we had a habit of locking up corrupt billionaires for 20 years
Re:FTX's Sam Bankman-Fried Should Serve 40 to 50 Years in Pr...
by throwaway74432 on Friday March 15, 2024 @11:44PM
(#39723198)
There's only about 3000 billionaires in the world. Again, cost is a moot point.
I understand that for this type of crime the goal is deterrence rather than rehabilitation, but let's say we had a habit of locking up corrupt billionaires for 20 years instead of 50. I'd argue that the lost opportunity cost for people that wealthy (or really for anyone) that 20 years is as much a deterrent as 50 years, but at a lower cost to the tax payer.