How our legislatures have become corrupt

[Darth Executor]

Sean might like this:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/entire...lobal-casualty

[Cow Poke]

The problem is that we want ALL The legislators thrown out on their butts, except the ones WE vote for!

We need to throw them ALL out. No exceptions.

[seanD]

I have to believe you don't really mean this the way it looks.

Correct. I'm certainly not saying it's not illegal and immoral. I'm saying I could care less whether they enforce it or not. It's just one among many actions that occur in this evil fallen world that will be judged -- just part of the territory. But when it affects many people, that's when it becomes an issue we shouldn't be apathetic about.

[Cow Poke]

Correct. I'm certainly not saying it's not illegal and immoral. I'm saying I could care less whether they enforce it or not. It's just one among many actions that occur in this evil fallen world that will be judged -- just part of the territory. But when it affects many people, that's when it becomes an issue we shouldn't be apathetic about it.

You honestly don't think that insider trading among politicians "affects many people"? Seriously? It's not just them "getting rich", Sean --- its the manipulation of the markets!

[seanD]

You honestly don't think that insider trading among politicians "affects many people"?

Yes. Isn't that what I just spent 7 posts trying to convey?

[Cow Poke]

Yes. Isn't that what I just spent 7 posts trying to convey?

I just wanted to make sure you really were that far out of touch with reality

[seanD]

I just wanted to make sure you really were that far out of touch with reality

I'm lost. Explain.

[Cow Poke]

I'm lost. Explain.

Sometimes I think you use (or fail to recognize) the double negative. Perhaps if you just spoke what you meant.

You seem to think that insider trading does not affect a lot of people.
A) Do you have any idea how many Americans are actually IN the stock market, at least to some degree, through their 401(k) or other investments?
2) How can insider trading NOT affect them?
C) Do you think that's not "many people" affected?

How bout trying to state what you DO believe instead of telling us what you are NOT saying something is NOT?

I'm certainly not saying it's not illegal and immoral.

How bout just saying what you ARE saying?

[seanD]

Sometimes I think you use (or fail to recognize) the double negative. Perhaps if you just spoke what you meant.

You seem to think that insider trading does not affect a lot of people.
A) Do you have any idea how many Americans are actually IN the stock market, at least to some degree, through their 401(k) or other investments?
2) How can insider trading NOT affect them?
C) Do you think that's not "many people" affected?

How bout trying to state what you DO believe instead of telling us what you are NOT saying something is NOT?



How bout just saying what you ARE saying?

Okay, I got you. Let me break it down. Insider trading in the market itself is the tip of the iceberg. Corruption has saturated the markets, upside down, inside out, right side up, so the markets are gone, beyond saving. Anyone who has any investments in the market is blame fool, period. Only way to save the market was a reboot -- letting it crash -- which is what the prior president should have done instead of bail-outs. This would have purged the markets. Instead, now the markets have gained even more leverage and risk than ever before. There's no solution here. But it's spilling into the political arena. We’ve always had corrupt politicians, but nothing like this. The executive branch is gone, beyond saving, no matter who we vote into office (IMO). The only hope we had left was the judicial and legislative. The fact the president (or at least this president) is bypassing the legislative process in some of his decisions, and setting that precedence, and the fact they instituted a so-called “super congress” to override the original Congress is looking like the latter is rapidly slipping away as well, if not already gone. So the point is, trying to regulate the corruption in the market is beyond feasibility, because even the regulators themselves are corrupt. But now this is affecting and spreading into the political arena. So if we don't nip it in the bud now, it will be irreversible (if not already is). Most people are clueless this is going on, so by nipping it in the bud is to not take an apathetic approach to it, but to become educated about it and spread it to others.

And if you're going to respond, please just state your argument with clarity and without butchering my post into little bitty obnoxious pieces.

[Cow Poke]

And if you're going to respond, please just state your argument with clarity and without butchering my post into little bitty obnoxious pieces.

But what if they come across that way?

[Andius]

Reading your posts, I got a better understanding of your posture (btw, thanks Cow Poke for bringing em out, heheh). I think I got a better handling of your posture.

I really don't get why you don't see the point when you actually state the point in your own post. What I have a problem with is what you just stated in bold.

The key difference will be revealed momentarily in the posts below

The two go hand in hand.

Oh I wish that were absolutely true. Here I differ because American legislators, like any good legislators, are also constantly screwing each other over. Not all legislators participate in forcing the economy (The American Congress is not an organic body that functions harmoniously, it is internal factionism of the highest order), yet for those who still got unfavorable outcomes in benefiting their business, they are still in effect, tipped off or well informed, and act in accord to insure the survival of their business, or in the case of those who didn't really take place in deciding outcomes, they can also in act in accord to profit their business (seizing the unexpected opportunity), for the former and the latter, I don't blame nor condemn them. The acts of the few does not constitute the representation of the whole.

If we don't enforce the law against insider trading, then what you stated in bold becomes a very potential reality, especially since we both know they're corrupt.

Uhm, yes, because the legislators will be happy to oblige to handicap themselves and defeat the entire purpose of why they are in Congress in the first place. It's bad enough as it is in criminalizing the very act to all actors outside of Congress (and it is in my hope some calamity befell the fools who pushed for the bill criminalizing the practice of inside trading).

Even if by some miracle it happened, and all inside trading within American Congress is effectively halted, what will be saved? I don't really share your optimistic expectation that said law will bring about some greater good (I only see greater harm being done by handicapping Congressmen themselves, and in effect, hurting the businesses they run). Given how the prohibition itself has brought more harm than good to American businesses (and such public regulation of inside trading pisses me off to no end).

If you enforce the law of insider trading, you eliminate that potential problem.

Doubt that it will, because you are not eliminating a problem, you are merely handicapping a symptom, whilst letting the true root cause of the problem continue to fester (imposed State regulations over the American Economy).


But, for the record, clarify something. How is it that, millions or possibly billions of individual's well being are at stake in the course of legislators engaging in inside trading? I don't understand, and admittedly, I ignore as to how is it even possible.

[seanD]

Andius, no offence (maybe it's just me), but I'm having a real difficult time deciphering your post. I've read it about three times with very little progress. I may or not respond depending upon if I can make heads or tails of what you're saying.

[Andius]

Andius, no offence (maybe it's just me), but I'm having a real difficult time deciphering your post. I've read it about three times with very little progress. I may or not respond depending upon if I can make heads or tails of what you're saying.

non taken seanD, mmhh let me see if I can clarify myself a little more (and perhaps I may be at fault as in not being clear enough), I will admit that I have a very weird posture that at surface, it does not seem consistent at surface(if you wish to know my complete background, my posture is the same identical one that the Mises Institute also holds).

- In principle, we both agree that inside trading in and of itself is a permissive action.
- You believe halting American legislators in engaging in the act of inside trading will remove one incentive for manipulating the economy, henceforth, inside trading + manipulate the economy = necessarily go hand in hand
- I believe that succesfully halting American legislators will do little to nothing to stop legislators from manipulating the American Economy (There are still LOADS of other creative ways to screw around the economy to benefit their businesses). Henceforth; inside trading + manipulate the economy = NOT necessarily go hand in hand. Legislators inside trading, I don't consider it a cause, I consider it an effect of a far far deeper cause, which is why prohibing it to legislators is a useless gesture at best that will practically be inconsequential in stemming the corrupt hearts of legislators.
- I loathe the criminalization of inside trading. Those who supported it's criminalization, were a bunch of short-sighted fools in handicapping business efficiency, and were even greater fools in believing legislators would do the same.

Am I spot on so far? Or did I err in something?

At least that's the skinny of it without going into loads of details

OH!! I think I have thought up of one way how thousands of people might get screwed over ^^ . Suppose they decided to kill off or reduce Medicare, automatically, those who have stocks invested in businesses that provide goods for Medicare to function, they will inmeadeately sell of their stocks. Yet the poor schleps who purchase said stocks are unawares of the future collapse of Medicare, making it into effectively terrible investments that will ruin them and the employees of the provider companies, leaving them financially ruined and without a job. Is this what you mean by how legislator's inside trading jeopardizes millions to billions of people's well being? (Amongst many examples I thought off).

[seanD]

It doesn't just have to do with decisions that affect the economy. I just put the thread here because it was a subject about the activities in the market. The bigger issue is influence of public legislative policy on any subject.

[Andius]

It doesn't just have to do with decisions that affect the economy. I just put the thread here because it was a subject about the activities in the market. The bigger issue is influence of public legislative policy on any subject.

*Jack Sparrow voice and swag*

Welcome to the Caribbean seanD


Until the day comes that legislators actually bother to isolate themselves like Buddhist monks from their own personal ambitions and desires, or their existence is effectively terminated along with their scaliwag counter-parts of the Executive and Judicial Branches, and never to be replaced by any power (I would prefer to the latter. ), you, like me, are going to have to accept the cruel fact that the public is virtually powerless in appealing or strong-arming their representatives in enacting or rejecting public legislative policies of their liking or hating. You will never be able to separate their personal desires from influencing public policies and laws, you may as well ask them to cease to be human.