this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2024
304 points (98.4% liked)
World News
32327 readers
666 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I read the article and I know her fraud was extensive but - anyone else feel like the death penalty for fraud is a bit over the top?
12.5 billion in fraud? Nah.
Just seemed to have no logical end point. Like stop, you've got yours, retire from the game before you die... Well, now she's going to die early. That's heavy but it's the path she chose.
It's not just "fraud." She cost people's livelihood, broke up families, and made people homeless directly through her actions. Even speaking as a marxist, banking isn't all intangible made up stuff. There are real individuals suffering consequences, and most of them aren't just rich people doing rich people things.
Personally, I don't think she should ever be allowed to die until she pays back her debt to society. Death is too easy.
Whether the death penalty should exist at all is a separate question, but Marxists generally recognize Engels’ conception of social murder.
Just about the only thing I agree with for the death penalty. Everything else can be reformed or quarantined. Wealth and power are cancerous. Doesn't matter where they are, they will never stop trying to take over, and total destruction is the only way to ensure they never get loose to wreak havoc on millions of us ever again.
I don't think anyone should suffer the death penalty, but I also think that there must exist some amount of generalized damage that is enough to cause surplus deaths
A death sentence is always excessive.
Fraud should be punished heavily though. Someone or several someones probably already died as a consequence of that money missing in the system. I'm not sure if a long jail sentence would be much better, with her being 67 it's a death sentence either way.
In my opinion they ought to follow the money. It's impossible for these amounts to just disappear or to have been used by her. It would make sense to keep her alive if there's any chance of recovering more of that lost money. But maybe that's the point.
Absolutely.