4 ms·
Outrage pointed at the government: I don't agree with the supposed intentions of the government. If the government really was trying to 'protect the little guy
by m52go 13y ago
Outrage pointed at the government:
I don't agree with the supposed intentions of the government. If the government really was trying to 'protect the little guy', it wouldn't allow all those short-term credit schemes that charge exorbitantly high interest rates.
Those things are toxic, screwing up peoples' lives all the time, but the government lets it keep on going.
What kind of person who can barely put food on the table invest in a startup? It's stupid.
Even if you can put food on the table, you should be able to do whatever the hell you want with your money.
False advertising and misrepresentation is the issue that needs attention here, not "protecting the little guy."
- nknighthb 13y agoUm, it's already all about "false advertising and misrepresentation"! It's all about disclosure. Any company can choose to comply with the reporting requirements and thus "go public", whereupon anyone who wants to buy shares in the company is free to do so at any time, even with their last penny. Even without complying with those requirements, companies can still, to a limited degree, receive investment from a certain number of non-accredited investors. What is it, exactly, that you think the SEC regs say?