4 ms·

> Doesn't it mean the system is flawed by design if you can't just pass the assets you legitimately own to a 3-rd party which wants it in exchange for cash with

by mises 7y ago

> Doesn't it mean the system is flawed by design if you can't just pass the assets you legitimately own to a 3-rd party which wants it in exchange for cash without collapsing the market and attracting prosecutors? Many regulations on the stock market are there because of past abuses. I'm typically rather anti-regulation as well, but it's like when you see "do not eat" labels on a box of razor blades: you know it's there because some one did it (and probably sued). Letting executives arbitrarily sell stock on a public exchange could have serious ramifications. > What if he just wanted to retire buying an island, building a castle, moving there and forgetting the business, not because he believes the business isn't going to grow but because he feels it's enough for him? His net worth is estimated at $350 million, from what I could find. Do you really think he's set an arbitrary target of $416 million net worth to just give up?

qwerty456127 7y ago
> it's like when you see "do not eat" labels on a box of razor blades: you know it's there because some one did it (and probably sued). By the way, is this an exaggeration or do things so ridiculous actually happen? Can I really sue and win if I eat a razor blade with no "do not eat" label on it? Or what if the label was there but I were blind or didn't speak English? > do you really think he's set an arbitrary target of $416 million net worth to just give up? This seems reasonable to doubt yet I don't think a person can't change their mind on half the way. E.g. he sets the target, works for it then feels overstressed occasionally and says to himself "I'm so tired of working, I already have $350 million which is enough to live happily for the rest of my life, let someone else take care of the business... Oh, and I want to donate half of the money to 3rd world charities..."
tathougies 7y ago
> Many regulations on the stock market are there because of past abuses. I'm typically rather anti-regulation as well, but it's like when you see "do not eat" labels on a box of razor blades: you know it's there because some one did it (and probably sued). Letting executives arbitrarily sell stock on a public exchange could have serious ramifications. The decline in price is not due to any regulation, but rather the free market. When people see many shares on sale, the price of the stock goes down due to free market principles. Let's not reach for blaming regulation when that does not change the fundamental nature of the game.

by mises 7y ago

qwerty456127 7y ago

> it's like when you see "do not eat" labels on a box of razor blades: you know it's there because some one did it (and probably sued). By the way, is this an exaggeration or do things so ridiculous actually happen? Can I really sue and win if I eat a razor blade with no "do not eat" label on it? Or what if the label was there but I were blind or didn't speak English? > do you really think he's set an arbitrary target of $416 million net worth to just give up? This seems reasonable to doubt yet I don't think a person can't change their mind on half the way. E.g. he sets the target, works for it then feels overstressed occasionally and says to himself "I'm so tired of working, I already have $350 million which is enough to live happily for the rest of my life, let someone else take care of the business... Oh, and I want to donate half of the money to 3rd world charities..."

tathougies 7y ago

> Many regulations on the stock market are there because of past abuses. I'm typically rather anti-regulation as well, but it's like when you see "do not eat" labels on a box of razor blades: you know it's there because some one did it (and probably sued). Letting executives arbitrarily sell stock on a public exchange could have serious ramifications. The decline in price is not due to any regulation, but rather the free market. When people see many shares on sale, the price of the stock goes down due to free market principles. Let's not reach for blaming regulation when that does not change the fundamental nature of the game.