On Tue, 20 Mar 2001, Matt Jensen wrote:
--]So Tom, dropping your bogus hypothetical, tell me about *existing* gov't
--]securities regulations. Are you in favor of them? Insider trading, pump
--]and dump, margin limits, all of these things that protect investors are
--]proactive. Do you want to scrap them and let the possibility of a civil
--]suit keep brokers and IPO-hungry execs in line? Just curious.
--]
If you aleep with dogs it would be a safe bet youll wake up with fleas,
unless you pick the dogs you sleep with carefully.
So to with investment. As we have seen all the govt regualtions have done
is crated new and better strains of the virulent predicotry nature of the
money makers. I see it much as I see overuse of antibiotics not only
failing long term in its job but creating new and even more dangerous
problems.
I think the Insider trader laws in places now do little more than force
the insider tading to go deeper undercover. I would rather it be upfront
and visable.
Hiddig a problem does little good for me. I am not an ostrich , this is
not my mode of facing danger.
There can be some very broad laws sepaking to fraud that would cover these
issues without simply creating an enviroment for shifting problems.
Narrow versus broad.
Also please be counting into your eqaution of legal regulations the need
for a growing body of employyed rules deabters and enforcers, who once
employeed seek to continue employement by creating more rules and
enforcement oppertunities.
Case in point, well, look around you. Exmaples abound.
Reiterative and recurrisive. Loopey loop loop.
Measure twice, cut deep.
/"\ [---=== WSMF ----http://wsmf.org---===---]
\ /
X ASCII Ribbon Campaign
/ \ Against HTML Mail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 27 2001 - 23:14:32 PDT