Red Hats, you need to speak up on this

#27
#27
McDad said:
You put their assets into a blind trust. You prevent trading while a member of Congress. You apply the same principle of insider trading to our "public servants".
Click to expand...
Are you saying that if a member of Congress went into office in 2006, and owned J.C. Penney stock at $81 per share that he would be forced to still own it today at 41 cents a share?
 
#28
#28
hog88 said:
Blind trusts are not truly blind. And you can't stop spouses, kids, cousins ext from owning stock and trading.

I think the SEC just needs to make a few examples.
Click to expand...
Spouses, kids, cousins are all subject to pre existing insider trading laws.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tennvols77
#29
#29
1972 Grad said:
Are you saying that if a member of Congress went into office in 2006, and owned J.C. Penney stock at $81 per share that he would be forced to still own it today at 41 cents a share?
Click to expand...
That is what would happen if you prohibit trading "while a member of Congress."
 
#30
#30
1972 Grad said:
Are you saying that if a member of Congress went into office in 2006, and owned J.C. Penney stock at $81 per share that he would be forced to still own it today at 41 cents a share?
Click to expand...
If that member is on a committee which has influence over retail department stores, gains an advantage because of their position of power, and/or acts in a manner which violates the law the rest of us are playing by, yes.
 
#34
#34
McDad said:
Well as long as it is difficult, let's just drop it. Wouldn't want anyone to break a sweat.
Click to expand...

McRib cut you off, you're a little pissy this morning?

I want those that broke the law held accountable. I want all members of congress investigated. What I don't want is new rules that would dissuade an actually good and honorable candidate from running for office.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEO, McDad and 1972 Grad
#36
#36
hog88 said:
McRib cut you off, you're a little pissy this morning?

I want those that broke the law held accountable. I want all members of congress investigated. What I don't want is new rules that would dissuade an actually good and honorable candidate from running for office.
Click to expand...

God asked to be shown 10 honorable men in order to save Sodom and Gomorrah. Show me 10 honorable (truly honorable; not politically honorable) men in office in DC.

We get new rules and regulations all the time. Every administration adds to the 22,000 laws on the books. It's time the people in charge get equal treatment. If rules against profiteering prevents someone from running for office, perhaps they weren't the right character anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Al Orange, marcusluvsvols, davethevol and 3 others
#37
#37
McDad said:
God asked to be shown 10 honorable men in order to save Sodom and Gomorrah. Show me 10 honorable (truly honorable; not politically honorable) men in office in DC.

We get new rules and regulations all the time. Every administration adds to the 22,000 laws on the books. It's time the people in charge get equal treatment. If rules against profiteering prevents someone from running for office, perhaps they weren't the right character anyway.
Click to expand...

I think it's already illegal for people in congress to profit from insider trading, there should be investigations and prosecutions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCFisher
#42
#42
McDad said:
Serious Q, before the recent 3, can you remember the last politician investigated and prosecuted for insider trading? I cannot.
Click to expand...

Nope, I can't either. Probably won't see any of those mentioned today investigated or prosecuted.
 
#44
#44
Orangeburst said:
For this to come out at this moment, this sounds like a power play to tilt the Senate.
Click to expand...
I read that Burr is retiring after his term is up in 2022. Don't know about Inhofe . I think that Loeffler has a special election coming up this year. I believe she was appointed to fill a seat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeburst
#45
#45
Public officials are supposed to be held to higher standards..............all of them. Hard to do when they are all in bed together and all of the agencies and departments in charge of keeping law, order, and accountability fall under the same misguided and corrupt machine they are supposed to keep in check.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#46
#46
MOOOOONEY said:
I don’t support this at all. Any bailout should be in a form of loan that’s paid back with interest.
Click to expand...
The only problem with a bailout loan -without oversight, is the executives can give themselves golden parachutes then tank the tank the place.
I absolutely agree our government can't have an ownership interest but as long as there's an outstanding loan there should be rules and regulations. Some on the shareholders as well as the Executive suite.
Lets face it, the US airline industry is a fragile bird that would have gone under had they not become innovative about charging for premium seats in coach and revenue from credit card companies. If we give them a pile of cash with no restrictions the Execs will cash out along with the savvy shareholders leaving the public without access to routes (and much higher fares as a result) and the last shareholders to bail empty handed.
 
#49
#49
hog88 said:
Blind trusts are not truly blind. And you can't stop spouses, kids, cousins ext from owning stock and trading.

I think the SEC just needs to make a few examples.
Click to expand...
However, if they do trade, and it is discovered that insider tips were used they and the congressman should go to prison.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top