Discuss HSBC bank crimes and the punishment it received. Explain why the Assistant U.S. Attorney General decided on a weak punishment.
What will be an ideal response?
HSBC was charged with laundering money for the Sinaloa drug cartel, Al Qaeda, and Russian Mobsters, in addition to helping Iran, Sudan, and North Korea evade sanctions and helping individuals and businesses cheat on their taxes. The punishment they received for committing these crimes was a fine in the amount of $1.9 billion, or about five weeks’ worth of profits. Lanny Brewer, the Assistant U.S. Attorney General stated that the bank employees were not criminally prosecuted or put in jail because it would have a negative effect on the economy. The bank would lose its banking license in the United States and “the entire banking system would have been destabilized.”
You might also like to view...
Why don't the winners from free trade win the political argument?
What will be an ideal response?
In the 1980s, U.S. economists acknowledged that it was not possible to exploit the trade-off suggested by the Philips curve of the 1960s. This realization led to more stable macroeconomic policy, which in turn contributed to:
a. more volatility in real output. b. less volatility in real output. c. complete removal of unemployment. d. more volatility in the price level. e. short business cycles.
What are the various sources of demand and supply in the market for loanable funds?
What is the main goal of most people in a nation that has a traditional economic system?
a. to make a significant profit b. to produce weapons instead of consumer goods c. to produce innovative new products that improve the quality of life d. to survive and not starve to death