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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Ride the Tiger with CD -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: grusum who wrote (189515)	7/19/2010 12:27:44 PM
From: robnhood	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 313695

I don't know. You might be right, but there was robber barrons in the early stages of American Capitalism, and no regulations.

To: grusum who wrote (189515)	7/19/2010 1:09:35 PM
From: Land Shark	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 313695

A lot of regulations are procedures and safeguards to protect the public interest. For instance, I'm sure BP has been concerned about their reputation, but took the risk of bypassing these procedures and safeguards to make a faster buck. The problem with relying on reputation instead of regulation, is that it's not proactive. That is, once the reputation is destroyed, the damage is already done. And the same factors may just destroy the reputation of another company that's oblivious to them. Or all companies may be using the same reputation destroying practices. The companies may just be forming a trust between them and to hell with the public interst (e.g. they all make a quick buck, despite the fact that they are killing children with Mercury poisoning). We've seen over and over again, companies denying any liability. Of course, you could point to the courts being the source of remedy. But, again that's just like reputation not being very proactive. And the only winners in ligitive environment are the Lawyers.