The Pros And Cons Of Corporate Crime Reform

Critics of corporate crime reform often argue that these are not victims, they ignore the fact that often times these people did not ask nor understand what was happening to them. One notable example of this is the conundrum of the 2008 Great Recession: The market went bad and now homeowner A owes 500,000 on a house now valued at 100,00 dollars. The easy option is to say, “too bad and so sad,” however is, that, right? The opposing view is that this individual new they couldn’t afford the loan and thus it is their own fault that they are in this situation. However, this doesn’t account for the fact that much like when you go to a Doctor, a Lawyer or any professional in a specific field you naturally rely on that individual to give you the best advice available.

This person was seeking what all Americans seek, a chance for a better life. A person who would think that bankers, who are financial experts would be able to determine if they were over-leveraged. The end result of this were that hundreds of thousands of people lost their homes, the bankers who caused these issues were not fired, or prosecuted, in fact they received bonuses at tax payer expense. The banking industry charged hefty fees to its consumers in order to pay the government loans back in record time. The same industry then reinvested billions into the political war chest of both Democrats as well as Republicans to fight the White houses’ efforts at additional reforms such as reinstating the Glass Steagall Act. The Obama administration was able to achieve some reform with the advent of the Consumer Protection Agency, whose sole purpose was to protect consumers for unfair business practices and would force banks as well as other corporations to be more forthcoming to the public about the actual cost of their