An excellent post by 1manband on why the pink, non
Post# of 9903
Posted On: 02/24/2013 3:27:14 PM
An excellent post by 1manband on why the pink, non reporting company market should be abolished:
1manband
Sunday, February 24, 2013 3:14:35 PM
Re: SmallCapsMarket post# 40458
Post # of 40470
I don't believe I misunderstood your point at all.
So what you are saying is that people have a right to be ripped off and taken advantage of? People have a right to be sold adulterated food and medicine, for instance? The US government disagrees, which is why the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 was passed. At that time, the government determined people being hurt by unlabeled and adulterated (fraudulent) food and drugs was not only harmful to citizens, but was damaging to the economy. They felt, rightfully so, that the costs of regulation far outweighed the so-called "loss of freedom" that existed before.
Same is true of securities. The NYSE began in 1792. But it was not until 1933 that specific regulations for securities were enacted. New regulations are added all the time to reflect changes in the economic environment and technology. Pink Sheet trading is an excellent example of that. The dollar volume of non-reporting stocks was minimal until the internet came around. Now the amount of fraud in non-reporting stocks is massive, but the economic benefit it provides is ZERO. Less than zero, due to the amount of fraud. I can go into the history of the pink sheet market and why it was allowed to exist in the past, but due to the market and technological changes that have occurred in the last 40 years, there is really absolutely no reason the pink sheet market should exist in 2013. Every other industrialized country has already figured that out. And it has absolutely nothing to do with the US being "a superior country". That is complete bunk and very similar to the arguments regarding slavery in the 1800's, which had been eliminated in every other industrialized country except the US. The US wasn't the first country to grant the right to vote to women either. Was that because the US was "superior" in thinking women were incapable of voting? Or did it just take the US longer to come to the conclusion changing the law and granting women the right to vote was a good idea ? All the other countries that eliminated unregistered securities trading have benefited greatly from the change. The fact that the US hasn't doesn't make it "superior" - it makes it behind the times.
Pink Sheet trading has absolutely nothing to do with rights. Except the "right" for people to commit fraud, and the hangers on that profit from such fraud by taking money to promote such fraudulent companies onto ignorant and unknowledgeable "investors". It provides absolutely no benefit to the economy whatsoever and should be abolished.
1manband
Sunday, February 24, 2013 3:14:35 PM
Re: SmallCapsMarket post# 40458
Post # of 40470
I don't believe I misunderstood your point at all.
So what you are saying is that people have a right to be ripped off and taken advantage of? People have a right to be sold adulterated food and medicine, for instance? The US government disagrees, which is why the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 was passed. At that time, the government determined people being hurt by unlabeled and adulterated (fraudulent) food and drugs was not only harmful to citizens, but was damaging to the economy. They felt, rightfully so, that the costs of regulation far outweighed the so-called "loss of freedom" that existed before.
Same is true of securities. The NYSE began in 1792. But it was not until 1933 that specific regulations for securities were enacted. New regulations are added all the time to reflect changes in the economic environment and technology. Pink Sheet trading is an excellent example of that. The dollar volume of non-reporting stocks was minimal until the internet came around. Now the amount of fraud in non-reporting stocks is massive, but the economic benefit it provides is ZERO. Less than zero, due to the amount of fraud. I can go into the history of the pink sheet market and why it was allowed to exist in the past, but due to the market and technological changes that have occurred in the last 40 years, there is really absolutely no reason the pink sheet market should exist in 2013. Every other industrialized country has already figured that out. And it has absolutely nothing to do with the US being "a superior country". That is complete bunk and very similar to the arguments regarding slavery in the 1800's, which had been eliminated in every other industrialized country except the US. The US wasn't the first country to grant the right to vote to women either. Was that because the US was "superior" in thinking women were incapable of voting? Or did it just take the US longer to come to the conclusion changing the law and granting women the right to vote was a good idea ? All the other countries that eliminated unregistered securities trading have benefited greatly from the change. The fact that the US hasn't doesn't make it "superior" - it makes it behind the times.
Pink Sheet trading has absolutely nothing to do with rights. Except the "right" for people to commit fraud, and the hangers on that profit from such fraud by taking money to promote such fraudulent companies onto ignorant and unknowledgeable "investors". It provides absolutely no benefit to the economy whatsoever and should be abolished.
(0)
(0)