'Safe' markets are valuable even for insiders, because they attract more investors and volume. People naturally want to invest where they won't be cheated. Tha

'Safe' markets are valuable even for insiders, because they attract more investors and volume. People naturally want to invest where they won't be cheated. That has been forgotten in the (largely manufactured, IMHO) anti-regulation outrage. Even the big Wall Street firms should benefit from regulation that makes non-insider investors feel the market is safe enough to invest in. That said, I'm confused and my theory fails: Despite the long run of incompetence and fraud on Wall Street, its reputation as the leading place to invest and for expertise seems to persist and it has resisted regulation to a great degree. You don't hear people say, 'don't invest in the stock market because you'll be cheated'; or 'don't hire (some major Wall Street firm) because look how they cheated these other people, and they demonstrated complete incomptence in events X and Y'. Their reputation seems immune. Maybe there are no better options.