Perhaps 100 is grotesque, but his sentence should be long enough to prevent from having any access to the markets he abused. 5 years is barely one boom and bust cycle. Should be more like 20.
You don’t need to put someone behind bars to deny them access to markets - you just need to give sentencing judges the power to ban them from engaging in certain activities (e.g. owning stock, being a corporate director or officer, trading on financial markets, etc)
Maybe sentencing judges don’t have that power - in which case, why doesn’t the legislative branch give it to them?
Not sure granting the judiciary carte blanche to make up their own punishments is the best idea.
I suppose the problem is the sentencing guidelines and societal expectations are for custodial sentences. But I think many people who oppose lengthy prison terms for nonviolent offenders when the offender is the neighbourhood drug dealer or some petty thief are suddenly no longer opposed when it is a (formerly wealthy) white collar criminal