this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2024
450 points (98.5% liked)

World News

39142 readers
2552 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world 151 points 7 months ago (25 children)

I don't think death sentences should be a thing.

[–] Coreidan@lemmy.world 83 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Neither should billionaires

[–] ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world 32 points 7 months ago (5 children)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (24 replies)
[–] merari42@lemmy.world 136 points 7 months ago (10 children)

I am all for billionaires facing consequences for their actions. The death penalty is still deeply immoral though. Locking financial criminals up like for example the American state did with Martin Shkreli or Sam Bankman-Fried though is completely o.K. and should happen more often.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 33 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (5 children)

The death penalty is still deeply immoral though.

The decision is a reflection of the dizzying scale of the fraud. Truong My Lan was convicted of taking out $44bn (£35bn) in loans from the Saigon Commercial Bank. The verdict requires her to return $27bn, a sum prosecutors said may never be recovered. Some believe the death penalty is the court's way of trying to encourage her to return some of the missing billions.

It appears to be a method the courts are employing to encourage her to surrender overseas assets.

In this particular situation, that $27bn is over 5% of Vietnam's GDP. This is a very significant hit to the nation's financial stability and one that will likely result in substantial number of excess deaths entirely due to increased poverty. I can see the threat of execution as a method to compel repayment as necessary.

In a better world, foreign banks complicit in Truong's 11 year long theft would cooperate to return the stolen money, thereby making this threat unnecessary. But so long as foreign financial institutions can hold a nation's wealth hostage, all the Vietnamese state leadership can manage is to respond in kind.

[–] clutchtwopointzero@lemmy.world 23 points 7 months ago

5% of GDP is just absolutely insane

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 26 points 7 months ago

I agree. Truong My Lan could just as well, lose her assets and spend her days repaying her debts to society. You know, on a normal person's wage, trying to make up for billions upon billions. Should be enough time.

[–] funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 9 points 7 months ago (3 children)

as someone opposed to prison-culture, I would suggest instead forcing them to contribute to society meaningfully through acts of service while losing privileges such as running businesses, sitting on boards, and reducing their ill-gotten gains to something akin to the average income and redistributing their stolen wealth to benefit communities.

Them sitting in a cube doesn't help society, but if they were forced to solve homelessness or else face The Cube, that would be better.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I agree, but only if they can't bribe their way out. A billion can hire a lot of people.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] WhatsThePoint@lemmy.world 73 points 7 months ago (3 children)

In America they would likely do time in a country club prison if they didn’t only get fined for less than they profited in the fraud.

[–] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 34 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The only time they would get punished at all in the US is if they fucked over other billionaires. Even then, only maybe.

[–] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 18 points 7 months ago

I bet that's part of why she's in this situation, rich people lost money. Lots of corrupt government officials also want the spotlight to stay on her. I mean of course in addition to the fact that she did ruin many people's lives...

[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

"I sentence to you ten years, with 9 years 360 days credit for time served, and a $25 fine. Your incarceration shall consist of checking in once weekly via Zoom."

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kalothar@lemmy.ca 47 points 7 months ago

She can appeal still, and they are doing it as an incentive for her to return 27b. I imagine she will attempt to return a large portion, appeal and then just be given life in prison.

[–] sepulcher@lemmy.ca 36 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Don't kill them. Redistribute their wealth.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago

In this particular case, she's hidden money overseas and the death penalty is being used to compel her to recover and return it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 35 points 7 months ago

Normally I'd say that if you empower the state to execute a certain class of person you can look forward to the state changing that definition so that inconvenient people who did nothing wrong meet it, but I'm unlikely to be mistaken for someone who has committed 10s of billions of dollars in fraud and I can't help but feel like maybe if just one robber baron is held responsible for the enormous suffering they cause in pursuit of an amount of wealth so vast that it can never be spent and essentially only functions as a high score then the rest will realize that there is the sharp, distinct possibility that they can be held responsible as well.

[–] Luvs2Spuj@lemmy.world 35 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Now do the other billionaires.

More seriously though, this is fucked up.

[–] Leviathan@lemmy.world 13 points 7 months ago

Fucked up is the amount of suffering inflicted on others is required to amass billions of dollars. I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir, though.

[–] BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I'm not for the death penalty. She should be in prison for the rest of her life without a chance of getting out. Can't say I don't understand why they're opting for the death penalty though. 44 billion is a fuckload of money. Like more than the gdp of 84 countries.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 31 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Anyone worth more than a billion dollars is guilty.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 26 points 7 months ago

Some are more guilty than others, and she's definitely near the top of the list.

Still, curious to see what a Socialist country like Vietnam does when its prosecutors catch a person like Truong My Lan red handed. Its such a far cry from what American prosecutors did with offending bank managers after the 2008 Financial Collapse or the UK prosecutors who investigated the Wirecard scandal or the SEC/FCC responded to countless instances in which Elon Musk got caught manipulating stock prices.

Goes to show you what happens when your country has a tyrannical government and its billionaires don't enjoy any freedoms.

[–] KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 7 months ago (6 children)

cool to see white collar crime actually fucking punished, for once in my lifetime.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 18 points 7 months ago (18 children)

in socialism rich people have way less influence to snake out of consequences. good on them.

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] zephyreks@lemmy.ml 14 points 7 months ago (13 children)

sigh

Do people consider the US to not be capitalist because of SEC regulations, the FDA, FAA, and other organizations impeding the free market? Do people consider the US to not be capitalist because of tariffs on, say, Canadian aluminum?

Why do people consider only end-stage communism to be true communism? Why do people consider only end-stage socialism to be true socialism?

[–] Nevoic@lemm.ee 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (13 children)

It's just semantics at the end of the day, so not too important, but I'll play along because I happen to be someone who will call the U.S capitalist, but doesn't understand why people call China communist.

First, I'll start off with some definitions. If you disagree on one, provide your own and we can use those for the sake of discussion.

Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.

_

Socialism is an economic and political philosophy encompassing diverse economic and social systems characterized by social ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private ownership.

_

Communism is a socioeconomic order centered around common ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange that allocates products to everyone in the society based on need. A communist society would entail the absence of private property, social classes, money and the state (or nation state).

So essentially the easiest way to determine if your society is capitalist or socialist is the existence of private property. If the society is devoid of private property, then the question remains what kind of socialism is it (is there money? Markets? Social classes? A state?).

China isn't even socialist by this definition, but even if it was, it would still be miles away from communist.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] Beaver@lemmy.ca 12 points 7 months ago

This is a very rare situation that almost never happens.

[–] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I Propose we make any Fraud worldwide over a Billion Dollars punishable by Death to!

[–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Man, if you think this is actually about fraud and she had dump trucks of cash in her basement...

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 10 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Eighty-five others were tried with Truong My Lan

All of the defendants were found guilty.

Uh... either the scale of fraud is huge, at the level of a crime syndicate, or they are convicting some innocent people. Usually the government overcharges people to encourage confessions, leading to some people being found innocent.

Do we really think the Vietnamese prosecutors are the best in the world? Maybe the jury really hated these people.

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 37 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Vietnamese law prohibits any individual from holding more than 5% of the shares in any bank. But prosecutors say that through hundreds of shell companies and people acting as her proxies, Truong My Lan actually owned more than 90% of Saigon Commercial.

They accused her of using that power to appoint her own people as managers, and then ordering them to approve hundreds of loans to the network of shell companies she controlled.

The amounts taken out are staggering. Her loans made up 93% of all the bank's lending.

The scale of fraud was huge.

[–] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 8 points 7 months ago

She was a nobody in the 80s. The Mafia wishes they were this successful.

This is only possible with a corrupt system enabling behavior like this. I can see why Prime Ministers were caught up in this.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

"Show trial" usually means "nit a real trial and the person may be innocent". The tone of the article is that she did the crime.

I am confused.

load more comments
view more: next ›