Here...
http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com/top100.html


"THE TOP 100 CORPORATE CRIMINALS OF THE 1990's

1) F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.
Type of Crime: Antitrust
Criminal Fine: $500 million
12 Corporate Crime Reporter 21(1), May 24, 1999

2) Daiwa Bank Ltd.
Type of Crime: Financial
Criminal Fine: $340 million
10 Corporate Crime Reporter 9(3), March 4, 1996

3) BASF Aktiengesellschaft
Type of Crime: Antitrust
Criminal Fine: $225 million
12 Corporate Crime Reporter 21(1), May 24, 1999

4) SGL Carbon Aktiengesellschaft (SGL AG)
Type of Crime: Antitrust
Criminal Fine: $135 million
12 Corporate Crime Reporter 19(4), May 10, 1999

5) Exxon Corporation and Exxon Shipping
Type of Crime: Environmental
Criminal Fine: $125 million
5 Corporate Crime Reporter 11(3), March 18, 1991

6) UCAR International, Inc.
Type of Crime: Antitrust
Criminal Fine: $110 million
12 Corporate Crime Reporter 15(6), April 13, 1998

7) Archer Daniels Midland
Type of Crime: Antitrust
Criminal Fine: $100 million
10 Corporate Crime Reporter 40(1), October 21, 1996

8)(tie) Banker's Trust
Type of Crime: Financial
Criminal Fine: $60 million
12 Corporate Crime Reporter 11(1), March 15, 1999

8)(tie) Sears Bankruptcy Recovery Management Services
Type of Crime: Fraud
Criminal Fine: $60 million
13 Corporate Crime Reporter 7(1), February 15, 1999

10) Haarman & Reimer Corp.
Type of Crime: Antitrust
Criminal fine: $50 million
11 Corporate Crime Reporter 5(4), February 3, 1997"


Is suing them for a mere few hundred millions really effective? Isn't it better to liquidate them, or transfering ownership or management?

Our world is controlled by corporations, and yet, they are the greatest criminals in the planet? How can we allow such a thing?

I don't see Halliburton.

Our world is controlled by corporations, and yet, they are the greatest criminals in the planet? How can we allow such a thing?

Well, we let regular ol' murderers out on bail to walk the streets in perfect freedom, ain't that worse than the corporations? And only about half of all murderers are brought to justice, so ain't that a lot worse? When our prisons become overcrowded, the courts let many convicted criminals right back out on the streets, so ain't that wores?

How can we allow such things?

Baron Max

This list measures criminal activity in dollars, but for the society, the effect could be more devastating than the dollar value.

Let's say if we take it for granted that certain companies pushed this administration into war, a few thousand dead is more valuable (more damage) than 50 million bucks...

This list measures criminal activity in dollars, but for the society, the effect could be more devastating than the dollar value.

But could also be LESS devastating. Even the horrendous Enron scandal really resulted in little damage to the society as a whole. The Exxon oil spill in Alaska was devastating to a few people, but the society barely felt the effects of it, if at all.

..., a few thousand dead is more valuable (more damage) than 50 million bucks...

With that thinking, then the auto makers of the world have "caused" millions of lives in car accidents in just the last few years. Add to that, the makers of gasoline for those cars. Society has lost millions of lives to car accidents.

Baron Max

Well, we let regular ol' murderers out on bail to walk the streets in perfect freedom, ain't that worse than the corporations?
No. Anyone that dies of cancer or from bad pharmaceuticals are victims of corporations. That's a lot more people then the ones murdered by people.

And only about half of all murderers are brought to justice, so ain't that a lot worse?
And how many corporations are brought to justice? More then half?

When our prisons become overcrowded, the courts let many convicted criminals right back out on the streets, so ain't that wores?
The courts never put corporations in jail. Besides, america still has the most overcrowded jails in the world... More then 2 million american systems are in jail.

How can we allow such things?
Yes, indeed. How can we?
I still don't understand what the ineficiencies of your jail system have to do with criminal corporations....

This list measures criminal activity in dollars, but for the society, the effect could be more devastating than the dollar value.
Yes, of course. As I said, they don't really pay enough...

But could also be LESS devastating. Even the horrendous Enron scandal really resulted in little damage to the society as a whole. The Exxon oil spill in Alaska was devastating to a few people, but the society barely felt the effects of it, if at all.
What are you talking about? Society is not the only stakeholder here. What about the environment? For how many millions of years will the oil spill affect the area?

With that thinking, then the auto makers of the world have "caused" millions of lives in car accidents in just the last few years. Add to that, the makers of gasoline for those cars. Society has lost millions of lives to car accidents.
Baron, corporations have supported the war. There's an actual direct causal relationship here. Ironically, those corporations you are mentioning are some of those.

Even the horrendous Enron scandal really resulted in little damage to the society as a whole.

You just like to be wrong... :)

I could look it up, but at least 1000 people lost their retirement money, so yes, society got a big hit. It was even bad by dollarvalue, if you multiply those accounts one by one...


Society has lost millions of lives to car accidents.


Of course wrong analogy, again. The difference is that the war wasn't necessery, changing position from point A to point B is... And try to walk from NYC to LA...

Man, I appreciate your trying, but you will NEVER win an argument against me... :)

I see Baron Max is still an idiot.

I see Baron Max is still an idiot.

The sad thing is that one would think that after 8000+ posts here he could learn something or at least was able to construct a logical argument... Sad, really sad...

Here...
http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com/top100.html


"THE TOP 100 CORPORATE CRIMINALS OF THE 1990's

1) F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.
Type of Crime: Antitrust
Criminal Fine: $500 million
12 Corporate Crime Reporter 21(1), May 24, 1999

2) Daiwa Bank Ltd.
Type of Crime: Financial
Criminal Fine: $340 million
10 Corporate Crime Reporter 9(3), March 4, 1996

3) BASF Aktiengesellschaft
Type of Crime: Antitrust
Criminal Fine: $225 million
12 Corporate Crime Reporter 21(1), May 24, 1999

4) SGL Carbon Aktiengesellschaft (SGL AG)
Type of Crime: Antitrust
Criminal Fine: $135 million
12 Corporate Crime Reporter 19(4), May 10, 1999

5) Exxon Corporation and Exxon Shipping
Type of Crime: Environmental
Criminal Fine: $125 million
5 Corporate Crime Reporter 11(3), March 18, 1991

6) UCAR International, Inc.
Type of Crime: Antitrust
Criminal Fine: $110 million
12 Corporate Crime Reporter 15(6), April 13, 1998

7) Archer Daniels Midland
Type of Crime: Antitrust
Criminal Fine: $100 million
10 Corporate Crime Reporter 40(1), October 21, 1996

8)(tie) Banker's Trust
Type of Crime: Financial
Criminal Fine: $60 million
12 Corporate Crime Reporter 11(1), March 15, 1999

8)(tie) Sears Bankruptcy Recovery Management Services
Type of Crime: Fraud
Criminal Fine: $60 million
13 Corporate Crime Reporter 7(1), February 15, 1999

10) Haarman & Reimer Corp.
Type of Crime: Antitrust
Criminal fine: $50 million
11 Corporate Crime Reporter 5(4), February 3, 1997"


Is suing them for a mere few hundred millions really effective? Isn't it better to liquidate them, or transfering ownership or management?

Our world is controlled by corporations, and yet, they are the greatest criminals in the planet? How can we allow such a thing?


why is Exxon only 6'th? shouldnt it be on no#1

I see Baron Max is still an idiot.

Not really...IMHO idiots are those who answer him/her.

why is Exxon only 6'th? shouldnt it be on no#1

Because Exxon is smart enough (better political connections) to pay only $110 million which is like pennies on the parking lot.

THE TOP 100 CORPORATE CRIMINALS OF THE 1990's
Umm, corportions are non-corporeal legal entities. It is impossible for a corporation to be a criminal.

So much for clarity of thought.

One wonders why you think irrationally jumping up and down and waving your arms all around over supposedly evil nonsensicalities can be construed by a thinking person as the equivalent of rational analysis.

You're wasting your own intellectual energy, and others' time.

Umm, corportions are non-corporeal legal entities. It is impossible for a corporation to be a criminal.


But the management can be - by inference...

Umm, corportions are non-corporeal legal entities. It is impossible for a corporation to be a criminal.

So much for clarity of thought.

One wonders why you think irrationally jumping up and down and waving your arms all around over supposedly evil nonsensicalities can be construed by a thinking person as the equivalent of rational analysis.

You're wasting your own intellectual energy, and others' time.
May I enlighten you? I can give you a small legal lesson... ;)

You see.... corporations have the status of "persons". That's because when the 14th Amendment was written to protect slaves, corporate lawyers took advantage of it to claim corporations as "persons", and give them all this freedom. So now, corporations are liable for their actions- not the management nor the shareholders. So, yes, we can speak of corporations as persons, because, by law, they ARE persons. And by law, management cannot be held accountable.

I hope this clarifies the issue... :rolleyes:

Because Exxon is smart enough (better political connections) to pay only $110 million which is like pennies on the parking lot.
As I've said many times before, they can buy justice....

May I enlighten you? I can give you a small legal lesson... ;)

You see.... corporations have the status of "persons". That's because when the 14th Amendment was written to protect slaves, corporate lawyers took advantage of it to claim corporations as "persons", and give them all this freedom. So now, corporations are liable for their actions- not the management nor the shareholders. So, yes, we can speak of corporations as persons, because, by law, they ARE persons. And by law, management cannot be held accountable.

I hope this clarifies the issue... :rolleyes:
So, when I kill my corporation out from under your prosecutorial ass you're going to indict me for 1st degree murder? http://www.sciforums.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Is this the best rebuttal you can make?

You are not worth my time...

Anyone that dies of cancer [snip] are victims of corporations.
Explain yourself.

Carcinogens in household productshttp://www.preventcancer.com/consumers/household/carcinogens_home.htm

Work and environmental carcinogens
http://www.preventcancer.com/work/

Children being born filled with carcinogens
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/national/story.html?id=9c0adfe8-1b38-4ccb-a3c5-618e8c33835b&k=26328


All those carcinogens were put into the environment by corporations. Before corporations, cancer was rare. Now, it is an epidemic.

Explain yourself.

the universe...with all the radiation...must be a corporation of GoD!

The GOD corporation! lolz:p

All those carcinogens were put into the environment by corporations. Before corporations, cancer was rare. Now, it is an epidemic.

Well, you're the very one who wants all of the progress that's going on in the world! How do you think you can enjoy this forum, your computer, etc, without all those corporations delivering products that YOU demand?

By the way, there was lots of cancer in the early days, it just wasn't called cancer ...mostly it was called "consumption" or no even diagnosed. A man isolated on a farm dies in his early fifties, they called it old age!

Baron Max

Well, you're the very one who wants all of the progress that's going on in the world!
Where did I say that?

How do you think you can enjoy this forum, your computer, etc, without all those corporations delivering products that YOU demand?
I buy my cleaning products from corporations such as Seventh Generation.
http://www.seventhgeneration.com/

So... no. I don't demand highly cancerous products. I demand healthy products.

By the way, there was lots of cancer in the early days, it just wasn't called cancer ...mostly it was called "consumption" or no even diagnosed. A man isolated on a farm dies in his early fifties, they called it old age!
"Consumption"?

Yes, it is true people died of cancer, even thousands of years ago. However, cancer has been discovered for about half a century and data shows it has only been increasing since then. An american politician once even "declared war on cancer" several years ago (1979, if I'm not mistaken). We failed miserably in this battle because we are not preventing cancer. Not even the American Cancer Society is interested in preventing cancer. That's because you can't. Your economy depends too much on products that are highly cancerous.

Is this the best rebuttal you can make?
It's all the rebuttal needed.
You are not worth my time...
Yet you took time to write that.

Community college, right? GED?

Well, you're the very one who wants all of the progress that's going on in the world! How do you think you can enjoy this forum, your computer, etc, without all those corporations delivering products that YOU demand?

By having non-criminal corporations delivering the products.


By the way, there was lots of cancer in the early days, it just wasn't called cancer ...mostly it was called "consumption" or no even diagnosed.

Wasn't consumption tuberculosis?

edit:

looked up consumption in the dictionary. It can also mean general wasting of the body.

By having non-criminal corporations delivering the products.

But they aren't "criminal corporations" until they're found guilty of some infraction in a court of law. So how do we know, how can we tell? And since we can't ...should we all just quit buying anything from "corporations"?

looked up consumption in the dictionary. It can also mean general wasting of the body.

It was a term used to describe most anything that the doctors weren't sure of and/or what people generally used when a person died before old age without any known sickness.

Baron Max

The people that lead huge corporations wake up everyday and say " How can I make more money?". Which in reality means how can I rip more people off?

Umm, corportions are non-corporeal legal entities. It is impossible for a corporation to be a criminal.

So much for clarity of thought.

One wonders why you think irrationally jumping up and down and waving your arms all around over supposedly evil nonsensicalities can be construed by a thinking person as the equivalent of rational analysis.

You're wasting your own intellectual energy, and others' time.

It's called mental masturbation, Mr.G and it grows hair on the brain, that is why we see so much fuzzy logic from the liberals on the Forum.

Compared with past eras, stomach cancer has decreased, brain cancer has increased, lung cancer fluctuates with tobacco consumption, etc.

In general, aside from brain tumors AFAIK, most of the increase in cancer overall has been in the cancers of old age - meaning over 60. There are a lot more people over 60 than there used to be, and they aren't dying of abcessed teeth any more.

Another factor is size. Bigger people have more cells capable of going bad, in all their organs.
- - -

What can happen to a corporation, besides a fine ? a state can revoke its legal existence, its charter.

Well, we let regular ol' murderers out on bail to walk the streets in perfect freedom, ain't that worse than the corporations? And only about half of all murderers are brought to justice, so ain't that a lot worse? When our prisons become overcrowded, the courts let many convicted criminals right back out on the streets, so ain't that wores?

How can we allow such things?

Baron Max

Your argument makes no sense. Who said this was an "either" "or"-type of issue in the first place? What makes you hate murder, thievery, and robbery so much more than white-collar crime?

And why won't just admit it? Corporate crime is a bad thing too, to say the least.

Given the size and legal resources of these corporations, they have to be pretty bad to get convicted. And this issue of corporate governance is still a big unresolved issue. Bush II and his owners put in place a modest financial reporting reform referred to as Sarbanes Oxley. But that is for investors and does nothing for other types of criminal actions which a corporation might execute.

There are many people who have a stake in corporations. If you punish the corporation as a whole you also punish the innocent (employees, families, suppliers, customers, etc) as well. In most corporations the stockholders have little influence over corporate management. That is why you see large corporations spending extravagantly on their executives. It is not the stockholder spending lavishly on the executives. It is the executives themselves. Those individuals within a corporation responsible for the criminal acts should be made to pay for their criminal actions. And that would include Chief Executive Officers and board members. Additionally, shareholders should be given the ability to nominate directors and those nominations appear on the ballots. Corporate management needs to be more open and performance based. Unfortunately, once bad executives come to power, it is a about their power and not about the job. So they do things that ensure their survival not matter how poorly they perform. We need to put and end to that kind of behavior.
In my opinion, this is not likely to happen as long as lobbist rule our government. Corporate executives have too much interest to protect.

Just face it...100 years in to the future, it will be the corporations that will be running the planet Earth as governments.

My queston is, where is Enron, I mean I don't even think I know what antitrust is, but surely defauding everyday guys like me and you over our stock options and pension is a day light crime.

Just face it...100 years in to the future, it will be the corporations that will be running the planet Earth as governments You've got to be kidding me if you don't think they already do. Surely its not going to take 100 years.

Just face it...100 years in to the future, it will be the corporations that will be running the planet Earth as governments.

Corporations aren't nearly as powerful (relatively speaking) as they were in the early 20th century. Just take a look at all the antitrust violations on the list in the first post. Those laws are enforced with a vengeance.

Cooporations are the focal points of the economy, and every leader wants a good economy. so what are you gonna do? Okay, for instance 99% of all the security from America in Iraq are from security and mercenary cooporations like blackwater and co.

What can happen to a corporation, besides a fine ? a state can revoke its legal existence, its charter.
Which never happens, for obvious reasons...

Given the size and legal resources of these corporations, they have to be pretty bad to get convicted. And this issue of corporate governance is still a big unresolved issue. Bush II and his owners put in place a modest financial reporting reform referred to as Sarbanes Oxley. But that is for investors and does nothing for other types of criminal actions which a corporation might execute.

There are many people who have a stake in corporations. If you punish the corporation as a whole you also punish the innocent (employees, families, suppliers, customers, etc) as well. In most corporations the stockholders have little influence over corporate management. That is why you see large corporations spending extravagantly on their executives. It is not the stockholder spending lavishly on the executives. It is the executives themselves. Those individuals within a corporation responsible for the criminal acts should be made to pay for their criminal actions. And that would include Chief Executive Officers and board members. Additionally, shareholders should be given the ability to nominate directors and those nominations appear on the ballots. Corporate management needs to be more open and performance based. Unfortunately, once bad executives come to power, it is a about their power and not about the job. So they do things that ensure their survival not matter how poorly they perform. We need to put and end to that kind of behavior.
In my opinion, this is not likely to happen as long as lobbist rule our government. Corporate executives have too much interest to protect.
Yeah, well... ever heard of stock options and severance pay (which is not taxed, btw)? The severance pays executives give themselves are big enough for them to retire...! :rolleyes:

The problem is that the stockholders have fairly limited say and the stakeholders usually have NO say at all! So whoever is in power always governs as a dictator.

Corporations aren't nearly as powerful (relatively speaking) as they were in the early 20th century. Just take a look at all the antitrust violations on the list in the first post. Those laws are enforced with a vengeance.
Thos corporations are paying like.... less then 1% of what they have. Hardly a punishment. Certainly worth the risk of getting filthy rich, isn't it?

Corporations aren't nearly as powerful (relatively speaking) as they were in the early 20th century. Just take a look at all the antitrust violations on the list in the first post. Those laws are enforced with a vengeance.

I think they are just as powerful if not more so. What has changed is that they are much more sophisticated in how they approach and define anti-trust. Back in the early 20th century, anti-trust was mostly about vertical integration, meaning companies that owned most of the oil production. Now companies are not as vertically integrated as they were in the early 20th century, but they are more horizontally integrated, meaning they own the oil from the well head, through refining and distribution; right until it goes into your gas tank. What does this mean, few players in the market and more market control…a trust if you will. But this is not considered a trust for federal prosecution. Another favorite tack on anti trust is the formation of foreign cartels (OPEC). These cartels control large stocks of supplies and price fix products. American companies, like oil companies benefit handsomely from these cartels, and are held blameless for the action of the cartels. Just as a side line, for all the interest and focus on American oil exports from the middle east, it might amaze you to note that the Untied States is a large exporter of oil. We export about a million barrels of oil a day. I suggest you verify by looking at the CIA World Fact Book
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html

This is why no matter how much oil we produce locally we will always be tied to the global price of oil set by the cartel. How likely is it that our government will require locally produced oil is sold only inside the US? Not very likely at all! Oil companies have no interest in the United States being energy independent. But I digress; we have bigger issues with trusts and corporations today than at any time in our history. However the issues are not the same and the level of sophistication has increased significantly

Yeah, well... ever heard of stock options and severance pay (which is not taxed, btw)? The severance pays executives give themselves are big enough for them to retire...! :rolleyes:

The problem is that the stockholders have fairly limited say and the stakeholders usually have NO say at all! So whoever is in power always governs as a dictator.

Is not that what I said TruthSeeker?