4 ms·

What is the reasoning behind limiting non-accredited investing anyway? Why is it a crime for me to give somebody else money if I am happy with the terms of the

• crisnoble 13y ago
  I guess they think that they know what's best for you. Either that or they want the good investments for themselves.
• sanderjd 13y ago
  I think it's the same as the reasoning behind limiting any form of gambling -- there is a savviness imbalance between the gamblers and the house, and the potential cost to society of gamblers losing more than they can afford is thought to outweigh the benefit of people being completely free to make their own decisions with their own money.
• npt4279 13y ago
  Thankfully, this will be legal in mid-2014, when the SEC finishes implementing the JOBS Act. In the 1930's - pre-Internet - people were more easily scammed by traveling salesmen selling oil wells and such. We have a lot more information at our fingertips these days.
  • jbooth 13y ago
    We have a lot more information at our fingertips these days, and 25% of the country is convinced that Barack Obama was born in Kenya. I feel like we're just running the cycle on this one, someone should put up a countdown to the next Enron and these investments being made illegal again.
  • tlrobinson 13y ago
    To be fair, people are still easily scammed on the Internet. See: Bitcoin stock exchanges.