I'm not sure if my view on this is complacency, fatalism, or somewhat valid, but I disagree. (I agree that it's broken, I don't think there's a good fix) A) we

I'm not sure if my view on this is complacency, fatalism, or somewhat valid, but I disagree. (I agree that it's broken, I don't think there's a good fix) A) we already have such an incentive in the form of long/short term ownership and tax benefits. It hasn't helped (in the sense that this behavior still exists) B) There's always a loophole. You're required to stay in 1 year? Your shares get converted to those of the company that survives. Or they structure the deal such that a holding company is created on day 1, the profits pass through, and the debt issues don't come through until day (requirement +1). Every control on financial deals comes a day late and dollar short - we can't penalize the crooked deals after the fact, and we can't predict what the financial industry will concoct until they do. Further, every law passed will be worked around anyhow because you can always structure a deal to create a loophole. The laws only force ever more creative products (read: complex and fragile). The only simple solution I see is to only allow a subset of deals, with contracts, terms, and arbitration set by the government. And that will never happen (nor be effective really, for the above).