Let me see...I wonder if I understand this issue. According to Al Jazeera, HSBC is a bank "...which operates in 80 countries and which made pre-tax profits of $21.9bn last year...." They get fined $1.9 or about 10% of only one year's income.
Fareed Zakaria of Time Magazine made some observations about people under some form of correctional supervision during this period of the "War on Drugs":
Drug convictions went from 15 inmates per 100,000 adults in 1980 to 148 in 1996, an almost tenfold increase. More than half of America's federal inmates today are in prison on drug convictions. In 2009 alone, 1.66 million Americans were arrested on drug charges, more than were arrested on assault or larceny charges. And 4 of 5 of those arrests were simply for possession.I wonder if the drug offenders were ever given the option of paying a fine of 10% of their income. From my reading, I know that HSBC isn't the only bank that engaged in this lucrative business.
It also appears from Zakaria's data that the War on Drugs has been good for banking business.
I agree with the author that crime pays if you are a bank. Hmmm, maybe that is why the "War on Drugs" has lasted so long.
Given the potential profits of criminal behavior and the unlikelihood of personal consequences for the executives directing it, the message is clear: Crime pays. This will inevitably lead to more reckless risk-taking that will further undermine systemic stability and lead to an even greater financial meltdown down the road.