I think people are missing that this is a money crime. In other words, the ROI from the crime is obvious, as opposed to something like murdering due to mental unhealth.

Then it's just a risk reward calculation - if the possible upside of a crime is $100B with a small chance of eventually being convicted and sentenced to a couple of years in prison, then it's up to each individual to decide whether it's worth taking the chance. I suspect there will be at least one person that does - but once the possible downside is 100 years, then maybe not. A lower value than that may also be fine, but it's all just an expected value calculation in the end.

This is why punitive penalties are needed - both to prevent the same person from recommitting but others from copying. And with money crimes, given the size of the potential upside, it is natural to need a large potential downside to compensate.

It's somewhat unfortunate that the penalty for a mental health crime like murder is actually in comparison meaningless - generally the perpetrators are not going to be making the ROI calculation either way...