Hacker News Reader

It’s a good question that seems to hit the same chord as the death penalty argument.

I don’t hold this view, but I think the answer is: the goal is punishment, not deterrence, nor rehabilitation. People want “justice” which, in their view, can only be served via harsh punishment.

>20 years is as much a deterrent as 50 years, but at a lower cost to the tax payer.

The number of wealthy people getting those kinds of sentences is basically 0, so the cost to the taxpayer is a moot point.

but let's say we had a habit of locking up corrupt billionaires for 20 years

There's only about 3000 billionaires in the world. Again, cost is a moot point.

Don’t forget his Billionaire status came from fraudulent activities (taking other people’s money).

This isn’t punishing entrepreneurs.