More seriously: it's likely that there are indeed a lot of "optimally greedy" criminals - it's just that we don't label them criminals, because they don't get caught. I guess the actual numbers are somewhat dependent on your trust in the ability of law enforcement.
> perhaps the consistency of his behavior made it seem 'normal' to the local bankers?
Perhaps it was just the '80s, when banks didn't really want to ask any questions.
> the relationship between intake and risk is probably not linear.
I agree there. Note that criminals do tend to understand this, typically regarding the results of conviction. It's the reason capital punishment is not really a deterrent: because once you pass the threshold (which is often with a single act), punishment does not grow prportionally, so they might as well do it over and over.
I don't know, how big is Wall Street nowadays? /s
More seriously: it's likely that there are indeed a lot of "optimally greedy" criminals - it's just that we don't label them criminals, because they don't get caught. I guess the actual numbers are somewhat dependent on your trust in the ability of law enforcement.
> perhaps the consistency of his behavior made it seem 'normal' to the local bankers?
Perhaps it was just the '80s, when banks didn't really want to ask any questions.
> the relationship between intake and risk is probably not linear.
I agree there. Note that criminals do tend to understand this, typically regarding the results of conviction. It's the reason capital punishment is not really a deterrent: because once you pass the threshold (which is often with a single act), punishment does not grow prportionally, so they might as well do it over and over.