A one off situation like you describe can be limited to punishing the particular branch manager. However, banks like Deustche and JPMorgan, who seem to be having these issues nonstop with regularity, are clearly run to allow these kinds of criminals to actively participate in their banking structure with minimal oversight, hence the responsibility resting on the higher-ups.

> removing Dictators from power

One way to remove dictators from power is to disrupt their money flows, so tighter banking regulations to prevent fraud and money laundering.

> simply because they have 10x-100x more employees

There are plenty of large banks who do not have this issue. Considering Deustche on its own has had more sketchy money than pretty much all other banks combined (according to the article) speaks volumes.

Please name a single dictator removed from power using banking regulations.

Then explain why the banking system is used against Dictators who still have voting rights in the UN.

Maybe if we had better systems in place to prevent fraud and laundering, we could do better. Banking regulations are preferrable to the other means we have of removing dictators from power: war, old age, violent revolutions.

You just said not removing dictators is preferable to removing them, since all financial regulations can be evaded by dictators. You can’t name a single dictator brought down by financial regulations.

And bloody war and revolution is preferable to inaction, because every day is bloody under tyranny. Averting your eyes doesn’t stop tyrants from killing and oppressing their people.

How do you remove a dictator from power without invading that country?

Imagine managing a nuclear facility.

One of your employee is bribed to open the valves and a whole region is flooded in nuclear waste.

Would you argue that the higher up managing that facility have nothing to be blamed for, because it was just a rogue employee’s issue ? What are they even managing, if they can’t make sure to have an healthy and working organization ?

How often do you ride your straw horse?

No one is saying management has no responsibility. It’s saying they should be judged on whether they put reasonable controls in and used reasonable efforts to ensure they are followed.

The point is on “reasonable”.

We are so far away from any reasonable efforts that we’d need to put pretty drastic punishments to even have a chance to tip the balance on the “too much” side.

In particular in the current situation we are talking about rampant criminal behavior, it seems weird to me to go “don’t tap too hard on their fingers, they are doing all their best, sending memos every quarter to absolutely not make money though unethical ways”

What “rampant” criminal behavior?

Do you currently see banks as a bastion of straightness and uncorrupted values ?

We have scandals after scandals for as long as I can remember, from the pettiest levels (opening sub accounts without telling clients to meet sales figures, blacklisting bankers from the whole profession when they dare refusing to play along) to nation wide crisis inducing levels.

The point of this article should be that SARS are filed often for things that aren’t criminal, mostly for things that aren’t criminal. So where is all that crime?

Again, the only specific crime you’ve listed is the Wells Fargo commission scam committed by mid level employees to up their compensation. They didn’t steal anything or kill anyone, they created some extra accounts to look good in review.

Well, the CEO get’s paid life-changing money for that position, sure there should be some life-changing liability

Would you take a job paying $10M a year if you will spend the rest of your life in prison if a single one of your ten thousand employees commits a felony?

Then maybe we should check whether the existence of entities capable of paying such amounts tot the executive is a sustainable way to have a business?

Yes absolutely.