I worked in AML tech for a bank earlier in my career. I put up a fight against this misuse of terminology for a while, but eventually just gave up. Just embrace that everything is money laundering to many people and life is easier.
Or worse, government giving favorable regulatory decisions to companies that donate to foundations that in turn lobby the government to do things that it has no public support to do?
These are all actual money laundering, and the salaries (and resumes) of the people who are involved reflect this. This is not "I don't like how they are spending money" or "they are incompetent." They're not hiring white shoe union busting law firms because they're dumb, petty, or short-sighted.
Otherwise it seems like you're just describing abstract forms of malfeasance which is very uninteresting.
It reminds me of when health fads take off. Everyone "has OCD" or whatnot. I'd talk to people and they've given me a rundown of who they claim they were, but lol, they weren't that person.
Everyone can identify and use words however they want. Once it goes viral the meaning of the word changes. It's difficult to parse who people are nowadays cuz of it.
There's no sense fighting it. Someone will tell you you're wrong, you're out of touch, you just don't get it, or "your vibe isn't right".
No it definitely has not
Do you think I was literally saying the financial definition has changed?
I have to confess, I've never heard anyone talk about money laundering in the way you suggest.
Again, I'm kind of an expert in AML, so I probably pay attention to it way more than you do, and probably have a much better perspective on this. I constantly see people refer to almost all misuse or misallocation of funds as money laundering.
Maybe you just don't know what money laundering actually is? Because the vast majority of the public certainly doesn't.
Are you accusing Wikipedia of actual money laundering?
If you are accusing them of being bad at business or bloat (which is all that's alleged in the article you linked to), then the answer is NO. So you should just say NO.
If you are accusing Wikipedia of actual money laundering, that is concealing the source of illegally gotten money, then the answer is YES.
Please reply YES or NO so we can have a single conversation about the claim being made.