the lobbies, make the CEOs do something besides ride the crest of waves, criminalize insider trading (I mean with sentences and everything), drain the offshore accounts (or revoke citizenship, one or the other) and see where we are a year from now. Any of you Romney-supporters got the hair?
Insider trading is already against the law, but it's pretty much unenforceable. Be just as well to make it legal.
I'd bet we COULD make the case against the first 5,000 inside traders and send them off to Terra Haute for 15 or 20 years. After that, we probably wouldn't have to make any more cases.
Imagine that...actually enforcing the laws and penalizing them for breaking them. Helluva idea there! Show the wealthy pricks their cash can't protect them....it could work!
You can't revoke the citizenship of any American regardless of what they do with only one exception. And I'm not advocating jailing white collar criminals no matter what they do.
Sounds like someone who voted for CHANGE......... ......has finally realized they voted for a complete FRAUD and utter LIE. . . .
I'm not bothering to send to jail someone that steals all my money electronically. Have them put on an ankle bracelet and have them pay the money back. I want jails full of people who point a shotgun and me or my friends and family during a robbery. People sure get overally worked up about nonviolent financial crimes
For one thing, most inside traders are rich and they just bribe the judge or the DA and that's that. But even if the case goes to trial it's tough to prove the info was insider stuff. Lots of inside traders go on obscure internt message boards and post the inside info so they can show, in the event of a trial, the info was out there for everyone.
In my opinion, simply solving official poverty via unemployment compensation may also solve for some of those issues as well, simply because more people will be attempting to be good Capitalists instead of mediocre Socialists.
As far as insider trading goes. I think the honorable thing for Congress to do would be to pass incredibly strict policies on what they as Congressman can benefit from in government. Government service was supposed to be just that, service. It is supposed to a be sacrifice not an opportunity to pad your ego and pocketbook, which is what it's become. I'd like to see laws in place that restrict ANY standing or retired member of Congress, AND their direct family (spouse, kids and parents) from EVER investing in companies they have direct policy interests in. That means they can't invest through a blind trust while they are in office. Their spouse can't invest while they are in office. And even after they leave office, there should be at least a 10 year gap before they could invest in industry they have had the ability to affect. This would go a long way to changing the purpose that many go to Washington to carry out. I won't accept the argument that they deserve the benefits they receive for their hard work. I think we'd be better off with smart, honorable people that earn a real living going to Washington with principals, rather than great businessmen and salesmen that can out fundraise others and go to Washington to feed their families estate troughs.
None of that is practical though. As long as the U.S. federal govt. has such influence in the U.S. economy it is ridiculous not to expect people in govt. to use their knowledge. The entire "government service" concept is a quaint notion with no validity today though. Just like the archaic "citizen soldier" idea. Our govt. today has to have professionals to administer and direct it just as our military requires long serving professionals.
I believe Romney did that already in Mass. I dont understand why you hate off shore accounts so much ? Would you agree we need other nations money parked in our Banks.? You cannot be so blind to the way investment works. Democrats haven't a clue. You cannot FORCE people to invest in American banks where they receive LESS and are charged more than else where.That would give American banks even MORE power to rule and cheat the investors. It would be like forcing every one to be union..everyone to pay 40 % income tax..and then give NOTHING to those who risk investments. Jobs and business who die within a year. How about DEMANDING the poor contribute something instead of demanding those who already pay more get less? If you get welfare..have a job corps. Unemployment ? a 2 year vocational retraining program. FORCE THE POOR to make a concession ..not to be poor.Help but not for ever.Train those who are willing..teach that dunking a basket ball is not a job...or hitting 280 a lifetime secure job...Foot ball players do not play for 30 years...and Any fool can make a BABY..ask Forrest Gump. That is true conservatism...Not surrendering to weakness..giving up on those without hope.
Lobbyists should go...telling anyone what to do with "their own money" is abhorrent. If CEO's want to put it in a pillowcase, that is their right. You dispute the right to control your own money?
I'm still wondering what kind of parachute Cheney received from Halliburton at the end of his term. I'd bet there are $millions sitting in a numbered account somewhere.