4 ms·

Well, it's not like the SEC does anything meaningful these days anyway. Along with the FCC and FTC. In fact, I can't think of anything meaningful any of these a

Well, it's not like the SEC does anything meaningful these days anyway. Along with the FCC and FTC. In fact, I can't think of anything meaningful any of these agencies have done in recent history. Edit: It's interesting this post in particular was so divisive. We don't have a well functioning market, my phone is effectively worthless these days, and monopoly and over-regulated corporate practices effect my day-to-day life in the most mundane of ways. But apparently that's not a good opinion here to share. OK.

scottmcleod 6y ago
This is just not true. From firsthand experience and just any basic research.
- Dopameaner 6y ago
  From a complete layman, Do you have any good data points to start research for this topic? My initial thoughts are scanning through news websites.
  - roughly 6y ago
    At a first pass, https://www.sec.gov/news/pressreleases https://www.sec.gov/news/pressreleases lists at least 8 enforcement actions in the month of April alone, along with a few other things.
EGreg 6y ago
The JOBS act? Crowdfunding? Test the waters most recently? Expanding who is an accredited investor? No-action letters to various cryptos? The list goes on...
cookguyruffles 6y ago
If you don't think the SEC are keeping busy you probably haven't been looking very hard. Ignoring enforcement which someone else mentioned, they are the only thing stopping exchanges charging every human on the planet $1000 each time they blink. It's a full time job in itself, and the SEC can be quite heavy-handed in increasing competitiveness despite a continuous onslaught of lawsuits from incumbents every time they sneeze. Recent examples include approving an IEX order type that fundamentally undermines a traditional business model for the exchanges (but is beneficial to just about everybody else), and the new market data initiative approved last year which should greatly reduce extortionate rentseeking on the part of the exchanges, while forcing them to share data with the public (depth of book) that previously cost 6 figures per exchange per user annually. Both of these generated immediate lawsuits from NYSE
anthony_romeo 6y ago
If you'd like a better sense of what they do, they have a number of RSS feeds: https://www.sec.gov/about/secrss.shtml https://www.sec.gov/about/secrss.shtml. Most of the time, what I see is press releases about scammers they caught.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
datavirtue 6y ago
They keep the honest people honest.
- andrewmcwatters 6y ago
  Which is good, but they don't keep the dishonest people from dishonest practices, protect citizens from risk, nor protect consumers from antitrust practices anymore, respectively, it seems.
  - dnautics 6y ago
    > Which is good Only if rule-following is == honesty. There are probably honest people who can't afford to follow the rules (literally, in the sense of paying for the labor to check boxes on forms correctly) and dishonest people who can afford to cleverly check boxes on forms.
  - ysavir 6y ago
    I think that was the GP's point. They're implying that the agencies only engage in redundant work, not significant work.
  - aesh2Xa1 6y ago
    OP's statement should be read as such: "They make rules for people that follow rules. If you don't follow rules, then their rules do not apply to you." The implication is that they lack will, capability, or force.
    - not2b 6y ago
      I think it's mainly capability. I know an SEC lawyer; he's successfully prosecuted a number of insider training cases, but thinks the SEC doesn't have the resources to take on really big players if they put up a fight, because they can overwhelm the SEC with legions of top lawyers and stalling tactics that can make cases take forever. The IRS is the same way; they've been cut way back so they can't effectively fight wealthy cheaters, so they mainly audit poor people for claiming the earned income tax credit incorrectly; those are easy cases for them to bring. A lot of this is because the IRS and SEC have been gutted by Congress to benefit their wealthy contributors.
neolog 6y ago
> I can't think of anything meaningful any of these agencies have done in recent history. How much have you looked into it?
JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
The SEC has done things about ICOs

scottmcleod 6y ago

This is just not true. From firsthand experience and just any basic research.

Dopameaner 6y ago
From a complete layman, Do you have any good data points to start research for this topic? My initial thoughts are scanning through news websites.
- roughly 6y ago
  At a first pass, https://www.sec.gov/news/pressreleases https://www.sec.gov/news/pressreleases lists at least 8 enforcement actions in the month of April alone, along with a few other things.

EGreg 6y ago

The JOBS act? Crowdfunding? Test the waters most recently? Expanding who is an accredited investor? No-action letters to various cryptos? The list goes on...

cookguyruffles 6y ago

If you don't think the SEC are keeping busy you probably haven't been looking very hard. Ignoring enforcement which someone else mentioned, they are the only thing stopping exchanges charging every human on the planet $1000 each time they blink. It's a full time job in itself, and the SEC can be quite heavy-handed in increasing competitiveness despite a continuous onslaught of lawsuits from incumbents every time they sneeze. Recent examples include approving an IEX order type that fundamentally undermines a traditional business model for the exchanges (but is beneficial to just about everybody else), and the new market data initiative approved last year which should greatly reduce extortionate rentseeking on the part of the exchanges, while forcing them to share data with the public (depth of book) that previously cost 6 figures per exchange per user annually. Both of these generated immediate lawsuits from NYSE

anthony_romeo 6y ago

If you'd like a better sense of what they do, they have a number of RSS feeds: https://www.sec.gov/about/secrss.shtml https://www.sec.gov/about/secrss.shtml. Most of the time, what I see is press releases about scammers they caught.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

datavirtue 6y ago

They keep the honest people honest.

andrewmcwatters 6y ago
Which is good, but they don't keep the dishonest people from dishonest practices, protect citizens from risk, nor protect consumers from antitrust practices anymore, respectively, it seems.
- dnautics 6y ago
  > Which is good Only if rule-following is == honesty. There are probably honest people who can't afford to follow the rules (literally, in the sense of paying for the labor to check boxes on forms correctly) and dishonest people who can afford to cleverly check boxes on forms.
- ysavir 6y ago
  I think that was the GP's point. They're implying that the agencies only engage in redundant work, not significant work.
- aesh2Xa1 6y ago
  OP's statement should be read as such: "They make rules for people that follow rules. If you don't follow rules, then their rules do not apply to you." The implication is that they lack will, capability, or force.
  - not2b 6y ago
    I think it's mainly capability. I know an SEC lawyer; he's successfully prosecuted a number of insider training cases, but thinks the SEC doesn't have the resources to take on really big players if they put up a fight, because they can overwhelm the SEC with legions of top lawyers and stalling tactics that can make cases take forever. The IRS is the same way; they've been cut way back so they can't effectively fight wealthy cheaters, so they mainly audit poor people for claiming the earned income tax credit incorrectly; those are easy cases for them to bring. A lot of this is because the IRS and SEC have been gutted by Congress to benefit their wealthy contributors.

neolog 6y ago

> I can't think of anything meaningful any of these agencies have done in recent history. How much have you looked into it?

JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago

The SEC has done things about ICOs