Comments on: Why more investor protection is needed, not less http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/05/27/why-more-investor-protection-is-needed-not-less/ Fri, 05 Dec 2014 11:27:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: fred5407 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/05/27/why-more-investor-protection-is-needed-not-less/comment-page-1/#comment-5340 Tue, 31 May 2011 16:10:26 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/?p=14504#comment-5340 The congressmen advocating less regulation are PWAP’s “People Without A Plan”. All they know is what the lobbiests tell them. How many accidents does a drunk driver have to have before they take him off the road. All they know is let the financial community run wild and take money from social security and medicare.
I agree with doctorjay317.

]]>
By: doctorjay317 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/05/27/why-more-investor-protection-is-needed-not-less/comment-page-1/#comment-5318 Tue, 31 May 2011 02:14:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/?p=14504#comment-5318 @Greenspan 2

“America is self destructing due to greed and corruption. It is no longer a real country”

Yep, it’s the biggest casino on the planet and the bankers (no pun intended) can make up any rules they want. The relentless pursuit of ever-growing profits is unsustainable. The resultant financial disasters leave bigger and bigger voids that cannot be remedied.

God bless America.

]]>
By: JamesChirico http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/05/27/why-more-investor-protection-is-needed-not-less/comment-page-1/#comment-5311 Sun, 29 May 2011 23:19:15 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/?p=14504#comment-5311 Before congress does another thing, a penny per stock fee on sale or buy for stocks above $10/share, 1/2 cent $5-9.99 and 1/4 cent for under $5 should be the first step. Institutional investors take billions in equity away from corporations and small investor returns by computerized trading. Look at any stock see the breakpoints on sale then buyback at lower price going virtually back to the original level. High powered computers have algorithms working round the clock to steal equity from companies using this method.

]]>
By: mheld45 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/05/27/why-more-investor-protection-is-needed-not-less/comment-page-1/#comment-5310 Sun, 29 May 2011 23:00:09 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/?p=14504#comment-5310 Investing is about measured risk-taking. There is always a risk/return balance. Add more “protection” and your return goes down. There can be no such thing as a “protected” high-yield investment.

]]>
By: Chivelry http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/05/27/why-more-investor-protection-is-needed-not-less/comment-page-1/#comment-5308 Sun, 29 May 2011 22:27:37 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/?p=14504#comment-5308 En3, when times are tough, dividends are offered by the “not-strogest” or the strongest, but in traditional terms, too fearful of expansion.
The largest by “share” dividend awards, are the insders and financiers, that keep the company going. Divis are decieded by insiders-as state laws permits. State endowed Corprate laws have to be changed,, all of the States. Then worry about the company moving overseas. I guess what i’m saying is, Corps rule.
Company are always stripped anymore. The financial system is all about taking what is already built or attained and pulling the value out of it.. for some, and leaving a job, at best, for the employees.
Another red flag is the “buyback”. Seldom is the buyback in the open market. In essence, the profits stored up in the company go to the “insiders”… again.
Competition is only needed till the company is massively indebted. Then serves no purpose to those that started it, brought it public.. other than to say, then bottom feeding starts, by Investors into ruining any remaining equity structure.
The only way out for workers and those that drink the koolaid of belief these companys at any stage or size is worth hanging arournd financially is changing the laws that comprise what is Corprate rights to anything they wish. Such as staggered Director Boards and being able to spend company money in promoting and lobbing anyone they wish. Those two thing make it possible to delay challenging Director Divi decisions for two or more years, and puts the expense of the challenge on the backs of non-insiders… whom have , in some situations, virtually unlimited money to fight the insiders.

But, for “Consumer protections will never really ever be much good” the most good will be in the worst case scenarios. Example-Car tittle lenders that take protection under “hock shop” rules. Many a consumer does not know, is not told, and has little documentation, showing a 1000$ dollar loan, 12% and maybe more.. monthly! not APR, monthly! With late fees that double the payment on day 32 for the previous month. Before you say what idiot falls for that, ask how Lenders can, and why should it be allowed.
WHy should Auto sales outfits be exempt from telling the truth? Yes’ we all should take anything a sales person says with a grain of salt, but why are they allowed to say anything without reprise, like the Federal Institutes that have the mandate to say whatever is in the intrest of accomplishing their stated goal?

]]>
By: Chivelry http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/05/27/why-more-investor-protection-is-needed-not-less/comment-page-1/#comment-5307 Sun, 29 May 2011 21:41:19 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/?p=14504#comment-5307 All one can say for sure is the withdraw of certain regulations have always been reflected in Bubble bursts subject to those regs abandoned after the regs were pulled from the market.

This tends to make me believe, those that yell for less regulation in financial systems, have an agenda,,, an agenda that will result in Main Street hearing a large pop, while Wall Street send more employees to millionaires row.

Now if jail time was on the books, and I mean serious time, then no, we don’t need no stinking regs. But since jail time is not a option any longer for the bulk of the financial system operators, we beter at least have some way of seeing the problems up front.. as the back door escape from risk of tradtional punishment for misdeeds is now open for all except the out and out thieves.

]]>
By: EN3 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/05/27/why-more-investor-protection-is-needed-not-less/comment-page-1/#comment-5302 Sun, 29 May 2011 17:46:50 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/?p=14504#comment-5302 Would it not be easier to just regulate the amount of dividends they have to pay. Investors demand exuberant paybacks companies strip themselves in order to pay it. Curb these exuberant payouts and companies will be less likely to go out of business they could afford to pay their workers they could afford to be more competitive because it won’t be chained to there investors..

]]>
By: TomInWisco http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/05/27/why-more-investor-protection-is-needed-not-less/comment-page-1/#comment-5285 Sat, 28 May 2011 19:51:54 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/?p=14504#comment-5285 The response to the suggestion that we make our markets work for retail investors is deeply pessimistic. Yes, the money trust will always be looking to game the system to their end; yes, we will have to fight the influence of that money on our representatives; but, what choice do we have? Should we give up and not have functioning capital markets in America? This is a hard fight, but it is an important one and one that Americans cannot leave to whither in the bitter fields of our growing apathy. We have to stop being so apathetic. If you are concerned about this, as a first step, sign this petition http://act.boldprogressives.org/cms/sign  /petition_warren

]]>
By: 123456951 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/05/27/why-more-investor-protection-is-needed-not-less/comment-page-1/#comment-5280 Sat, 28 May 2011 03:37:08 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/?p=14504#comment-5280 Consumer protections will never really ever be much good. The bottom line is that Americans should have never been hoodwinked into believing that most stocks are a sound long term investment. When I was graduating from high school back in 1970, most stocks were for risk takers with money to gamble with. People were more conservative with their money back then. The Casino mentality of today did not exist. Many average investors today are either reckless or stupid or both. The other side of the coin is the enormous amount of money that investment insiders make these days. Totally disgusting. But wow, I’m sure glad they put that bad girl Martha Stewart in jail….lol….what ludicrous justice.

]]>
By: Greenspan2 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/05/27/why-more-investor-protection-is-needed-not-less/comment-page-1/#comment-5279 Sat, 28 May 2011 03:04:04 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/?p=14504#comment-5279 Regulators were intentionally constrained by the appointment of anti-regulation ideologues to head financial regulatory agencies. Staff who attempted were regulate were fired or stiffled. Congress intentionally restricted funding, just as the GOP is now doing. The US government is literally owned by the financial industry with the GOP doing its bidding. Bankers and brokers are not more intelligent. They resemble Osama bin Laden in that they devout their lives to figuring out how to game and bring down the system to their own advantage. America is self destructing due to greed and corruption. It is no longer a real country.

]]>