I wish the SEC would investigate NEM. I was an initial stakeholder. They refuse to release coins to hundreds of stakeholders who missed some un-publicised deadline a couple of years ago.
SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups
161–164 of 164 posts
Re: SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
The obvious question is whether that actually matters all that much for securities, since the broker/exchange adds negligible risk and overhead for the buyer relative to the trust in the public company needed to buy a stake in it and the costs of meeting regulatory requirements for public companies. Anybody who's more worried by the potential complications of T+2 settlement when purchasing blue chip stocks than the W…
That is indeed the right question to ask. Maybe it's less about trust and more about permission. With token based securities I could trade with whomever I choose whenever I want. Interesting to see how it turns out in the end.
What happens if a trade that is illegal under the law of the country of the seller/buyer/exchange? The courts would be completely powerless to undo the transaction. Again it seems to me the main and only attraction is evading regulation.
Re: SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're not making a common sense argument. Your argument is literally that you're upset that you cannot buy into investments which give you absolutely no insight, information, or any kind of knowledge that would let you actually be able to make an informed decision. That is not common sense one bit, and is just as silly as complaining that you can't sell yourself into slavery. Nobody is going to take an argument like…
It's common sense that a free society shouldn't restrict what someone can invest in. You have no idea what insights I have in a potential investment so please do not presume to know. I do not need or want the government to prohibit me from making an investment before it has had a chance to vet it. What you're advocating is illiberal and paternalistic, and your presumptions about the level of insight that goes into in…
"You're literally comparing investing in a speculative instrument"
Wrong. You're complaining about investments that give you absolutely no knowledge and no information about themselves, making you unable to make an informed decision. That's not even gambling, so don't try to call it investing.
"If you thought no one would agree with me, you wouldn't be going to such extreme lengths to counter my claims. You would be comfortable letting them stand on their own merit."
That line is absolutely false. If it had any merit whatsoever, this wouldn't be an internet forum.
Re: SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups
#164Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's common sense that a free society shouldn't restrict what someone can invest in. You have no idea what insights I have in a potential investment so please do not presume to know. I do not need or want the government to prohibit me from making an investment before it has had a chance to vet it. What you're advocating is illiberal and paternalistic, and your presumptions about the level of insight that goes into in…
"You're literally comparing investing in a speculative instrument" Wrong. You're complaining about investments that give you absolutely no knowledge and no information about themselves, making you unable to make an informed decision. That's not even gambling, so don't try to call it investing. "If you thought no one would agree with me, you wouldn't be going to such extreme lengths to counter my claims. You would be…
You have no idea how much information the investments you want prohibited give about themselves. Not being registered with the SEC does not imply providing no information, and you want everything not registered with the SEC to be banned. Your ridiculous characterizations of non-registered investments are baseless/dishonest and intended to mislead people about the nature of these controls.
The fact that you have to resort to this, and to comparisons of buying an unregistered investment to selling yourself into slavery, shows that you don't have a solid set of arguments to support your position, and that you're prioritizing your agenda ahead of the truth.
And like I said, your actions belie your claim that no one agrees with me. If you thought no one would agree with me, you wouldn't be going to such extreme lengths to counter my claims. You would be comfortable letting them stand on their own merit.