91–100 of 115 posts
In March . And not FTX specifically, but crypto in general. So, as d1str0 said, yes, very inflamatory (and misleading) headline.
The headline is still accurate, as stopping SEC inquiry in crypto would have the same effect.
Tell me it's not a corruption.
"The March letter from eight House members—four Democrats and four Republicans—questioned the SEC’s authority to make informal inquiries to crypto and blockchain companies, and intimated that the requests violated federal law." This wasn't an investigation into just FTX. This was a broader investigation into crypto companies, plural. The current post title of "Inquiry into FTX" seems to be editorializing. Dang must b…
It’s the title of the article which makes it appropriate here. That it’s a bad title, however, is not in dispute.
The eight congressmen: Tom Emmer (R-MN) Warren Davidson (R-OH) Byron Donalds (R-FL) Ted Budd (R-NC) Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) Jake Auchincloss (D-MA) Ritchie Torres (D-NY) Darren Soto (D-FL) The signed letter: https://emmer.house.gov/_cache/files/0/c/0c7fc863-7916-4b19-...
Their parties should kick them out and replace them with more principled people.
Their parties could evict them. But they’d retain their seats. Their voters gave those to them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would be ideal but in reality these party members raised money for the party so.. they’re in 0 trouble as far as their party is concerned. The system is a farting contest that enables this behavior. Solution would be to do away with the 2 party system and make parties more responsible with consequences as being completely voted out if corruption isn’t handled. Now both Reps and Dems are corrupted and they known…
Quoted post unavailable.
Is that a legitimate fact? I'm pretty sure Warren Buffet is better than her, maybe he's not the best but the point is you lied then got mad when downvoted
"Enforcement powers, while conceptually broader with respect to non-SEC regulated entities, are still circumscribed by statute, federal judicial review, congressional oversight and the Commission’s own policies and procedures for initiating and conducting inquiries and investigations. " Now that's being squishy-soft on crime. That's the point to make when those members of Congress come up for re-election. They're sof…
>”The crypto crowd has been yammering for years "but this is different". Well, it's not.” In what way? Some cryptocurrencies have been declared securities, while many have not. Those such as Bitcoin and Ethereum have been around for long enough that if they were going to be ruled as securities via Howey, that would have surely been done by now.
We are getting damn close to that being done through statute in the U.S.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have a government with a billion people in it, but none of them are allowed to do anything with investments or even hold/have 'extra' jobs while serving society, you reduce or remove the problem all the same. A teeny tiny government with 1 person in it can still mess with investments on a global scale all the same if they are allowed to do so. It 'fixes' nothing. The size and scope of a government is not what…
> The size and scope of a government is not what makes bad performers perform badly. It's bad people combined with bad policies. How bad is a different topic (there is no absolute 'badness', but there are definitely differences). The larger the size and scope, the more opportunity there is for bad actors. More cracks to slip through. More tills to dip into. It’s not the factor that makes a person corrupt, but the big…
I also want to point out the various dictatorship that have bankrupted countries. Sadam Hussain, various kings and queens over time , etc
So you can't prove that a smaller government would be less corrupt
There are politicians and media publications protecting Sam Bankman-Fried's criminality, but these congressmen aren't among them. The letter in this article was written in March. FTX's long-term fraud has only been known since early November.
You don't have to know about specific bad actions to shield the entity that is doing them.
Not that I'm personally against the SEC (and other agencies) crossing into crypto and interpreting their mandate broadly, rather than being overly conservative and waiting for new laws while the scammers run wild. But in other areas these paperwork demands could be a huge burden...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The size and scope of a government is not what makes bad performers perform badly. It's bad people combined with bad policies. How bad is a different topic (there is no absolute 'badness', but there are definitely differences). The larger the size and scope, the more opportunity there is for bad actors. More cracks to slip through. More tills to dip into. It’s not the factor that makes a person corrupt, but the big…
But you're ignoring other variable affected by the size of government. I also want to point out the various dictatorship that have bankrupted countries. Sadam Hussain, various kings and queens over time , etc So you can't prove that a smaller government would be less corrupt
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their parties should kick them out and replace them with more principled people.
> parties should kick them out and replace them with more principled people Their parties could evict them. But they’d retain their seats. Their voters gave those to them.