Bank Robbing a Terrible Business, Statistically

isoloisti writes "Three UK economists got access to national data on bank robberies. The conclusion is that robbing banks pays, but not very much. Average take is about $19k per person per robbery. But, there's a 20% chance of being caught per raid. To make an average income, a robber needs to do two jobs per year, and has greater than 50% chance to be in the slammer after 2 years."

Comments

Intelligence not a factor?

[garcia]

I RTFA but I didn't see any reference to the general intelligence of the robbers. From what I've always understood, intelligent bank robbers are generally not caught while those who just wandering into a bank with a paper sank and a finger gun end up getting busted quickly. You know, because they make it obvious who they are.

Re:Intelligence not a factor?

[couchslug]

Intelligent bank robbers get government bailouts, and don't go to PMITA prison.

Silly bank robbers use a mask and a gun, and have much worse outcomes.

Re:Intelligence not a factor?

[Chris Burke]

They can't just slap a single probability on a type of crime like this.
There are so many varying factors in getting caught, intelligence being a huge game changer.

Of course you can, just like you can slap a single probability on the chances of getting cancer, even though there are many factors that affect and even dominate an individual's chances.

That's the way statistics work. They tell you the average, but any individual trial (whether in the sense of a bank robber's take or a roll of the dice) may fall far outside of the average.

Of course when talking human behavior you the individual have control over some of the factors so you shouldn't just go with the statistics like you would at Vegas. Which is what most criminals seeing this statistic will do -- tell themselves that they are above average and can make bank robbery pay off. Of course they aren't going to get caught. They're too smart.

And then 20% of them do and become another statistic.

Re:Stupid thieves

[jxander]

Give a person a gun, and the can rob a bank

Give a person a bank, and the can rob a country.

Re:Stupid thieves

[Anonymous Coward]

Give a person a bank, and the can rob a country.

Absolutely, when there is no one watching what you are doing and the regulations are off the rails...it makes robbing a countryand its people so easy.

Just loan on the front and bet against those loans on the back...then ask for a bailout when things come crashing down (which banks knew would happen) and reward your board with big bonuses courtesy of the tax payers you already robbed...isn't double dipping great...especially against the middle class and poor.

Re:Stupid thieves

[Bigby]

Give them a political office, and they can accept money from the bank ...so the bank can legally rob a country

Re:Everyone already knew this.

[PCM2]

Some generations hence, people will tell stories to children where the mean, greedy third little pig is the villain because he did not build houses for the other two little pigs and the wolf.

I think Ayn Rand already wrote that fairy tale. The difference was that when she tried it, it was over 1,000 pages long.

Re:Stupid thieves

[Z00L00K]

Realize that today a lot of banks don't handle the physical money - they only handle digital money, so being a bank robber is soon futile.

To get cash you need to stand in the ATM queue.

The downside is that robbing a supermarket can give a better payoff.

Re:Stupid thieves

[Ellis D. Tripp]

"Which is the greater crime, to rob a bank or to own one?" --Bertold Brecht

Re:Stupid thieves

[spazdor]

this is too earnestly true to read as proper sarcasm.

i need a drink.

Re:Everyone already knew this.

[HapSlappy_2222]

850 pages of railroad references, 100 pages of John galt repeating the same idea over the radio using all the biggest words Rand could come up with, and 50 pages of Dagny getting banged by Hank, Francisco, or good old Johnny. The movie version would be 10 minutes of moderate porn, but you'd have to get through 90 minutes of the cable guy stompin around the living room first.

I was an A is A objectivist for a while; I enjoyed Atlas Shrugged the first time around. When I started seeing some personal success, I saw that hard work does not always equal success; many of the brightest and talented hard workers I knew got fucked, not rewarded, and it's often a crapshoot or who you know more than talent and hard work. You get up and try again if you're good at it and enjoy what you do, so that part is true, but talent doesn't rise simply because it's talented. Objectivism is an ideal, just like sharing the communist wealth means everybody gets a fair shake is an ideal.

It was a nice life lesson; I know now that anybody advocating the extreme is pushing an ideal on you, not a true way to live your life. Hard work, living a happy life, and helping others when you are both able and willing to do so is the way to go; and if you get some sort of crazy good benefits offered to you along the way, pounce like a puma.

Re:Stupid thieves

[SlippyToad]

Owning a bank is a business, like any other

No, it is not. A bank has power over an economy that no other institution can match.

saying that a business is 'crime' is strange at least,

LOL. Tell that to the drug dealers, oh, everywhere.

You are getting confused about "criminal" versus "illegal." Criminal is criminal, no matter the law. Illegal is when the law recognizes that something is criminal. But many businesses are actively criminal in that they steal from their customers, and actively harm their communities. The law has simply been bought to permit them to behave this way. Doesn't make it any less reprehensible.