Where does he say he wants to make a new category of behavior to punish? I don't see that anywhere in the article.
However, I do see this:
"We fine them, and what is the big lesson?" said Stiglitz. "Behave badly, and the government might take 5% or 10% of what you got in your ill-gotten gains, but you're still sitting home pretty with your several hundred million dollars that you have left over after paying fines that look very large by ordinary standards, but look small compared to the amount that you've been able to cash in."
Taken together, Stigliz said, this system of widespread fraud, lax regulation and non-deterrent enforcement, created a system of skewed incentives that rewarded criminality, gambling and other bad behavior, and left American workers, investors and homeowners holding the bill.
So please, why do you think jail time should be off the table for a white collar criminal who destroys the wealth of millions and of shareholders, but that jail time for say someone who steals a car is fine? That makes no rational sense. One is obviously more harmful, although a little less tangible than say stealing a car or a diamond, but it's still real value/wealth that they are effectively destroying/stealing.
You're acting like there is more innovation when there is less regulation, but that obviously isn't the case otherwise companies would be fleeing America for Africa.
>Killing off innovation in the USA could be easy, just introduce jail time into a conversation about what incentives might motivate the business community to be socially responsible.
This makes no sense, if they commit a crime, they should go to jail, end of story. We don't need to legalize crime to incentivize innovation.
However, I do see this: "We fine them, and what is the big lesson?" said Stiglitz. "Behave badly, and the government might take 5% or 10% of what you got in your ill-gotten gains, but you're still sitting home pretty with your several hundred million dollars that you have left over after paying fines that look very large by ordinary standards, but look small compared to the amount that you've been able to cash in."
Taken together, Stigliz said, this system of widespread fraud, lax regulation and non-deterrent enforcement, created a system of skewed incentives that rewarded criminality, gambling and other bad behavior, and left American workers, investors and homeowners holding the bill.
So please, why do you think jail time should be off the table for a white collar criminal who destroys the wealth of millions and of shareholders, but that jail time for say someone who steals a car is fine? That makes no rational sense. One is obviously more harmful, although a little less tangible than say stealing a car or a diamond, but it's still real value/wealth that they are effectively destroying/stealing.
You're acting like there is more innovation when there is less regulation, but that obviously isn't the case otherwise companies would be fleeing America for Africa.
>Killing off innovation in the USA could be easy, just introduce jail time into a conversation about what incentives might motivate the business community to be socially responsible.
This makes no sense, if they commit a crime, they should go to jail, end of story. We don't need to legalize crime to incentivize innovation.