Michael Milken got a raw deal. His actual criminal offenses only resulted in $318K of damages and were largely related to facilitating tax fraud by others. He was a piker compared to SBF. The judge in Milken's case gave him an unusually harsh sentence explicitly as a deterrent to others; I suspect it would have actually been lower under current federal sentencing guidelines.

https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/highly-c...

A philanthropist with the money he stole? His entire fortune is fruit of the poisoned tree. Milken is trash. He was in the 80s, and he is trash in the 20s.

No amount of philanthropy washing can erase the damage his done.

Fuck that guy.

Milken spent less than two years in prison, and was fined $600 million.

SBF has been sentenced for 25 years, and fined $11 billion. Pretty big difference - how much money does he have left?

Isnt 11bns after all his assets being seized?

You can be sure there's a healthy reserve put aside in his parents' name.

I honestly don't know what your point is. The topic being debated, "Is Michael Milken good?"

I'm not broadly aware of what Milken did but it sounds like he paid the price for his crimes and served his sentence. If he's rejoined society and has had a positive social impact, I'd call that a win.

I think that goes to show the inadequacy of the law more than anything. If he stole the same out of money by walking up to a bank teller, he would still be in jail

I mean, the damage is done. Let's not condemn him for at least doing good now. Would you rather he did nothing at all?

It's whitewash.