Like my grandfather told me when I was young “figure it out boy, because the world needs ditch diggers too”.[/quote]
Correct, with no bearing on what is ‘fair’ or not. It is just another example of abuse of power. If you work, you should eat, would you agree?
[/quote]
A lot of people are ‘poor’ because they can’t manage their fucking money and want to live beyond their means.
[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
How is a person that genuinely works hard for 15 dollars an hour and can’t provide for his family have the same freedoms of someone who works hard for 100 dollars an hour and has an abundance. [/quote]
How much you make has no bearing on how free one is or isn’t. Making $2 or $2,000,000 doesn’t change how the laws of a nation treat you.
[/quote]
That is patently false beans. Literally thousands of examples of this not being true.[/quote]
List a few then.
[/quote]
Teen who’s father is wealthy kills 4 people while drinking and driving, no jail time
Du Pont heir, rapes his own daughter, no jail time
One year work release for high speed chase with police and crashing into house and two cars, also his 7th DUI
[/quote]
These are examples of judge’s poor judgment. I see no examples of the law not applying to these people because they have money.
In fact all of them were charged.
The laws don’t treat them differently, shit judges did.
There only one set, and it doesn’t go in their direction. [/quote]
This is not soviet russia…we all have the same set of rules.
It’s weird, people just think that all rich people are like Bond villains.
I don’t get it.[/quote]
Tax rates.
I’ll die before anyone can produce IRS data that doesn’t show, clearly, that the top earners pay more in tax than anyone, and pay in a higher percentage in tax as a whole, than income they take in.
Last I heard it was something like the top 1% take in 20% of the income every year. (Keep in mind these aren’t static people, one year someone might be in the top 1% and the next, the bottom 50%) Yet they pay something like 30% of the taxes…
Other than that, this mystical idea that you are free from laws because you make money that other’s aren’t is bunk. If ti weren’t we wouldn’t have the SEC, and I wouldn’t have all the hoops I have to jump through to do my job everyday.
There only one set, and it doesn’t go in their direction. [/quote]
This is not soviet russia…we all have the same set of rules.
It’s weird, people just think that all rich people are like Bond villains.
I don’t get it.[/quote]
Tax rates.
I’ll die before anyone can produce IRS data that doesn’t show, clearly, that the top earners pay more in tax than anyone, and pay in a higher percentage in tax as a whole, than income they take in.
Last I heard it was something like the top 1% take in 20% of the income every year. (Keep in mind these aren’t static people, one year someone might be in the top 1% and the next, the bottom 50%) Yet they pay something like 30% of the taxes…
Other than that, this mystical idea that you are free from laws because you make money that other’s aren’t is bunk. If ti weren’t we wouldn’t have the SEC, and I wouldn’t have all the hoops I have to jump through to do my job everyday. [/quote]
[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Ok beans, let’s argue semantics, maybe not the law itself but the way that it’s applied, which is where it matters[/quote]
It’s not semantics.
It’s as Countingbeans said- corrupt and irresponsible judges.[/quote]
Bingo.
The judges you can punish. The law is hard to change. Look how long the Democrats resisted the Civil Rights Act. It took LBJ holding the entire party hostage to get it done.
[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Ok beans, let’s argue semantics, maybe not the law itself but the way that it’s applied, which is where it matters[/quote]
There are plenty of rich and famous people that serve jail time Matty. Bernie Madoff is a very good example. He committed fraud and was sentenced to 150 years in prison. So is Oscar Pistorus (homicide) and Wesley Snipes (tax evasion). There are also regular folks like you and I that walk away on technicalities.
Ok, you were right, I was inaccurately speaking about the application of the law, vs the law itself.
Do you guys think that a recent example would also be the Wall Streeters who were responsible (in part?) for the global recession?
Afaik, no one significant got in trouble.
[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Ok, you were right, I was inaccurately speaking about the application of the law, vs the law itself.
Do you guys think that a recent example would also be the Wall Streeters who were responsible (in part?) for the global recession?
Afaik, no one significant got in trouble.[/quote]
The application of the law can absolutely be fucked up. I agree with you to an extent. Its just that the door swings both ways, imo. I’ve talked about the Wall Streeters before (more or less argued actually) that this is a good example of poor application of the law. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your view point, things like GAAP, for example, are very complex and in most cases the worst outcome is a corporate fine with no individual jail time. However, there is legislature that deals with Corporate leadership’s failure to adequately detect things like fraud (see the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002), but it is inadequate, imo.
[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Ok, you were right, I was inaccurately speaking about the application of the law, vs the law itself.
Do you guys think that a recent example would also be the Wall Streeters who were responsible (in part?) for the global recession?
Afaik, no one significant got in trouble.[/quote]
Do I think quite a bit of players involved in that fiasco missed out on some punishment that they very much should have gotten? Yes. Including people in government.
[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Ok, you were right, I was inaccurately speaking about the application of the law, vs the law itself.
Do you guys think that a recent example would also be the Wall Streeters who were responsible (in part?) for the global recession?
Afaik, no one significant got in trouble.[/quote]
The application of the law can absolutely be fucked up. I agree with you to an extent. Its just that the door swings both ways, imo. I’ve talked about the Wall Streeters before (more or less argued actually) that this is a good example of poor application of the law. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your view point, things like GAAP, for example, are very complex and in most cases the worst outcome is a corporate fine with no individual jail time. However, there is legislature that deals with Corporate leadership’s failure to adequately detect things like fraud (see the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002), but it is inadequate, imo.
[/quote]
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Ok, you were right, I was inaccurately speaking about the application of the law, vs the law itself.
Do you guys think that a recent example would also be the Wall Streeters who were responsible (in part?) for the global recession?
Afaik, no one significant got in trouble.[/quote]
Do I think quite a bit of players involved in that fiasco missed out on some punishment that they very much should have gotten? Yes. Including people in government. [/quote]
Just to respond to the both of you.
I think what drives me nuts is that some guy that robs a store for 1k is getting a more severe punishment than people that are essentially stealing millions or billions (trillions?)
[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Ok, you were right, I was inaccurately speaking about the application of the law, vs the law itself.
Do you guys think that a recent example would also be the Wall Streeters who were responsible (in part?) for the global recession?
Afaik, no one significant got in trouble.[/quote]
The application of the law can absolutely be fucked up. I agree with you to an extent. Its just that the door swings both ways, imo. I’ve talked about the Wall Streeters before (more or less argued actually) that this is a good example of poor application of the law. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your view point, things like GAAP, for example, are very complex and in most cases the worst outcome is a corporate fine with no individual jail time. However, there is legislature that deals with Corporate leadership’s failure to adequately detect things like fraud (see the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002), but it is inadequate, imo.
[/quote]
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]MattyG35 wrote:
Ok, you were right, I was inaccurately speaking about the application of the law, vs the law itself.
Do you guys think that a recent example would also be the Wall Streeters who were responsible (in part?) for the global recession?
Afaik, no one significant got in trouble.[/quote]
Do I think quite a bit of players involved in that fiasco missed out on some punishment that they very much should have gotten? Yes. Including people in government. [/quote]
Just to respond to the both of you.
I think what drives me nuts is that some guy that robs a store for 1k is getting a more severe punishment than people that are essentially stealing millions or billions (trillions?)
Example, 4 years for $110 million.
[/quote]
You’ve gotta read the fine print:
“Belfort served 22 months at the Taft Correctional Center in Taft, California in exchange for a plea deal with the Federal Bureau of Investigation for the pump and dump scams he ran that led to investor losses of approximately US$200 million.[27] Belfort was ordered to pay back $110.4 million that he swindled from stock buyers.”
“Their cooperation proved to be extremely valuable to law enforcement, contributing to dozens of convictions of other significant wrongdoers. They each received substantially reduced prison terms from the court as reward for their assistance in prosecuting others.”