3 ms·

Safeguards are put in place because people are prone to malice, fraud, violence, and financial fuckups in the past. Mandate penalties if insiders are abusing t

Safeguards are put in place because people are prone to malice, fraud, violence, and financial fuckups in the past. Mandate penalties if insiders are abusing their responsibilities and hold people accountable.

CryptoPunk 9y ago
>>Safeguards are put in place because people are prone to malice, fraud, violence, and financial fuckups in the past. There's a difference between lawlessness and not having regulations that limit the range of contracts people are allowed to enter into. I'm not suggesting we should get rid of laws prohibiting violence, fraud, etc. I'm suggesting we should never violate the freedom to contract. >>Mandate penalties if insiders are abusing their responsibilities and hold people accountable. Yes we need to create a new regulatory agency that enforces these mandates. But then those who have worked in that agency will fetch a high price in the private sector. There is rampant exploitation of insider knowledge in Wall Street: https://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21736561-one-study-suggests-insiders-profited-even-global-financial-crisis-another https://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/2173656... >>The paper examines conduct at 497 financial institutions between 2005 and 2011, paying particular attention to individuals who had previously worked in the federal government, in institutions including the Federal Reserve. In the two years prior to the TARP, these people’s trading gave no evidence of unusual insight. But in the nine months after the TARP was announced, they achieved particularly good results. The paper concludes that “politically connected insiders had a significant information advantage during the crisis and traded to exploit this advantage.” There is no practical way to police this. The only solution is to avoid measures that centralize control of the economy, chief among them government intervention in the market place.

CryptoPunk 9y ago

>>Safeguards are put in place because people are prone to malice, fraud, violence, and financial fuckups in the past. There's a difference between lawlessness and not having regulations that limit the range of contracts people are allowed to enter into. I'm not suggesting we should get rid of laws prohibiting violence, fraud, etc. I'm suggesting we should never violate the freedom to contract. >>Mandate penalties if insiders are abusing their responsibilities and hold people accountable. Yes we need to create a new regulatory agency that enforces these mandates. But then those who have worked in that agency will fetch a high price in the private sector. There is rampant exploitation of insider knowledge in Wall Street: https://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/21736561-one-study-suggests-insiders-profited-even-global-financial-crisis-another https://www.economist.com/news/finance-and-economics/2173656... >>The paper examines conduct at 497 financial institutions between 2005 and 2011, paying particular attention to individuals who had previously worked in the federal government, in institutions including the Federal Reserve. In the two years prior to the TARP, these people’s trading gave no evidence of unusual insight. But in the nine months after the TARP was announced, they achieved particularly good results. The paper concludes that “politically connected insiders had a significant information advantage during the crisis and traded to exploit this advantage.” There is no practical way to police this. The only solution is to avoid measures that centralize control of the economy, chief among them government intervention in the market place.