4 ms·
My "hot take" if you will: SEC and FDIC aren't usually, to the general public, negatively seen due to their mission. Its the fact they don't prevent criminal /
by no_wizard 4y ago
My "hot take" if you will:
SEC and FDIC aren't usually, to the general public, negatively seen due to their mission. Its the fact they don't prevent criminal / unethical behaviors beforehand, and banks get away with alot before anyone intervenes.
I actually don't think the average US citizen is "anti regulation" with this. I think - and I include myself in this - that we see agencies like the SEC (more so than the FDIC) don't act fast enough or often enough, and when they do, the fines are a slap on the wrist vs the profit made by the bad behavior.
In a nutshell, they just aren't acting effectively, and thats why they get a bad wrap.
- sooheon 4y agoYeah, people like effective regulation, it's just regulatory capture is worse than no regulation.
- tl 4y ago> Its the fact they don't prevent criminal / unethical behaviors beforehand, and banks get away with alot before anyone intervenes. A better example is the IRS with a double standard of overzealous enforcement against individuals and small business who cannot defend themselves and complete non-enforcement against higher tiers of wealthy. In the case of the SEC or FDIC, this has resulted in the near elimination of smaller fish aside from protective carveouts like the Durbin Exempt Interchange.