this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
542 points (98.7% liked)

Atheism

5008 readers
47 users here now

Community Guide


Archive Today will help you look at paywalled content the way search engines see it.


Statement of Purpose

Acceptable

Unacceptable

Depending on severity, you might be warned before adverse action is taken.

Inadvisable


Application of warnings or bans will be subject to moderator discretion. Feel free to appeal. If changes to the guidelines are necessary, they will be adjusted.


If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a group that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of any other group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you you will be banned on sight.

Provable means able to provide proof to the moderation, and, if necessary, to the community.

 ~ /c/nostupidquestions

If you want your space listed in this sidebar and it is especially relevant to the atheist or skeptic communities, PM DancingPickle and we'll have a look!


Connect with Atheists

Help and Support Links

Streaming Media

This is mostly YouTube at the moment. Podcasts and similar media - especially on federated platforms - may also feature here.

Orgs, Blogs, Zines

Mainstream

Bibliography

Start here...

...proceed here.

Proselytize Religion

From Reddit

As a community with an interest in providing the best resources to its members, the following wiki links are provided as historical reference until we can establish our own.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ohlaph@lemmy.world 92 points 2 years ago (5 children)

$5 million fine, eh? That's merely the cost of doing business.

[–] SuckMyWang@lemmy.world 57 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Not really. It’s way way less than that

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 34 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's barely a fucking fraction of a rounding error of a sparrow's fart.

[–] ericisshort@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Why would anyone ever round a sparrow’s fart?

[–] Sabata11792@kbin.social 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] ericisshort@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I didn’t realize farts were taxable.

[–] Sabata11792@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago

The tax code is a dark and mysterious place built for the rich.

[–] Coasting0942@reddthat.com 7 points 2 years ago

Oh his, I was about to say a five million fine goes against the tenets of Monopoly Man, bless his appointed CEOs on Earth

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

That's not what that means. It means it's just an additional, and "normal", line item on the balance sheet, like toilet paper or the water bill.

Edit: Reposting as I replied the wrong comment initially.

[–] SuckMyWang@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

It’s not normal. It’s hugely undervalued. Not getting taxed on 32 billion for an extended period of time is completely game changing. It’s like saying having to pay an $8 fine for the stolen company car is just the normal cost of doing business. That being said I see where you’re coming from. They get different rules so it’s probably seen as ok in their eyes to get an $8 car or in this case to steal the car themselves and pay an $8 fine later

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

The phrase "cost of doing business" doesn't mean "bankrupt" or "righteous penalty", it means, especially in this context, that it's an normalized and accepted business expenditure because of our corrupt regulatory system whereby white collar crime is NOT punished by meaningful punitive actions that would create a deterrence. Instead, any punitive measures can simply be accounted for as a "cost of doing business".

Let me give you a hyperbolic but extremely simple example:

CEO: Let's commit a fraud worth $100m

VP: But that's illegal

CEO: Yes, but the fine would only be around $5m

CFO: Perfect, I'll add a $5m expenditure under the "cost of doing business" line item

VP: Wow, that's a great $5m expenditure, we'll net $95m in profit

CEO: Yep, that's just the cost of doing business.

Make sense?

[–] SuckMyWang@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I’m aware of what you are saying and I agree but only to a point. I’m saying that even as a “normal” cost of doing business the size of the fine is not normal. To take your example it’s like this:

CEO: “Lets commit 32 BILLION dollars of fraud.”

VP: “That’s illegal.”

CEO: “Yes but the fine would only be around $5m.”

VP: “Sir, I’m not condoning this but that estimate seems absurdly low for the size of the fraud?

CEO: “You’re right, the fine should be much much higher. Can we afford to get a $500m fine as a normal operating cost?”

CFO: “We can. I’ll also talk to my connections in Washington to get the amount lowered and anything else will be gravy. Also, VP you’re fired!”

[–] alvvayson@lemmy.world 13 points 2 years ago

It's just so politicians can say they levied multimillion dollar fines. And the voters are placated.

[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago

If the average APY is 5%, it's about a day of interest.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Yeah we need to set fines to amount attempted to savelikelihood of getting away with itpenalty modifier. They do this math before committing these crimes, the fine needs to actually deter them