Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : MANIPULATION IS RAMPANT --- Can We Stop It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LPS5 who wrote (347)	6/14/2002 1:49:48 AM
From: Threshold	Respond to of 589

I am terribly sorry to have angered you. You know I think you should head the SEC LP. Your overbearing arrogance seems to be quite appropriately used to defend the unsavory actions that are currently garnering quite a bit of airtime. So who put a nickel in you and made you Defender of Wall Street and its corruption. I guess you are right in saying it's all okay because it's been going on for a very long time. Frankly I am grateful for the transparency of it all, as it has made me a much better and certainly far more careful trader. How anyone can trust a word spoken on Wall Street is beyond me. Traders however, need movement in the markets to profit, and the current tide of corruption is serving only to kill said movement reducing profits for all. That is the suffering I speak of. I am not in favor of more regulation. I am in favor of strict enforcement and substantial punishment. I am not in favor of allowing people to pay fines in lieu of criminal prosecution. Why should one person do hard time for say marijuana possession while another pays a small fine for fraud (sometimes billions of dollars) or other white collar crimes and admits to no wrong doing? Lastly, what goes through your mind when one of those investment bank ads airs on CNBC. You know, the ones depicting young families and the promise of college education monies if one was to entrust their financial future to the advertiser?

To: LPS5 who wrote (347)	6/14/2002 7:16:42 PM
From: HairBall	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 589

LPS5: It's not about bribery; it's about coercion I think it is about both. How "silly" do you think it is that great portions of those particular settlement monies go to the treasuries of the states in question - while ostensibly the government acts on behalf of and serves the people? Not silly, shameful...and true! I mean, I wouldn't agree with this approach either, but doesn't it seem to make more sense that said settlement amounts should go to the "harmed" investors? Agreed... Depending upon where you sit, fat rich crooks have always run the country. Again we agree... Where there's fraud, more should be done about it than currently is. What is this, we continue to agree... I don't think the government should permit civil settlements - rather, that essentially all fraud should be treated (a) as a felony crime, and (b) at the state level. As long as you mean the government should not sue on a civil level I agree. However, individuals should be allowed to sue if necessary. And I strongly agree that all fraud should be treated as a crime and prosecuted at whatever level is necessary to obtain the conviction and with many companies this requires federal prosecution due to the limitations of a state’s jurisdiction. I just managed to get the DOL Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration to act after six months of prodding. After they finally got around to investigating they opened what I knew would be a Pandora’s Box. That lead to the Standard Operating Procedure, the DOL-PWBA is going to sue the company and principles involved even though the "News Release" clearly states that fraud, misuse of funds and embezzlement occurred. The remedy sought is for the named parties to pay back the monies stolen with interest. Of course, if this does not happen, the DOL “may” seek alternate remedies. What does this mean to the many companies out their abusing their employees’ 401K plans and self-insurance plans? From what I can tell by the blatant disregard for the ERISA regulations by so many companies out there, is that most know that the chance of being investigated by the DOL-PWBA is remote and if it does happen the likely remedy is to only be sued in an effort to recover the stolen loot with a little interest. IMO this is no deterrent. It is like only requiring bank robbers to give the money back "if" caught. It is no wonder that the 401K-retirement industry is littered with cesspools, IMO. Due to the legal built in concealment policies of 401K plans, very few of the employees in that company had any idea that the deferrals from their paychecks were not being deposited in their 401K Account (or insurance deductions were not being used to pay claims), not to mention the exorbitant fees being deducted from their accounts by the 401K third party administrator for minimal services rendered. The level of legal concealment facilitated by the investment company, the third party administrator and the company itself allowed the theft of the employee’s deferrals to go undetected by employees for quite some time. I was amazed. The lacking regulations and built in loopholes encourage third party administrators and investment facilitators not to mention the employers to take advantage of the employees. Coupled with the knowledge that enforcement is even looser, it’s a wonder that any company operates a fair and above board retirement plan! Fortunately through my efforts and a few others, it is likely that the DOJ will be moving forward with a criminal investigation regarding this particular company and its principles hopefully finally leading to a prosecution that will take them off the streets. I am still amazed that 95 percent of the employees of this company had no idea they were being defrauded. Now I’ve digressed into something off topic, sorry! Regards, LG PS: I did not work for this company, but someone I care about a lot did!