Well framed response Whazoo. I think you both make good points. I am against every form of government intrusion to the greatest extent possible. It simply costs too much for the little help, and in fact very often, the bureaucratic burdens that result. The best answer, IMO, is for both the people involved in a start up to have done their homework and know what they are about, and for the individual investor to do the same. It forces us to become educated about what we involve ourselves with. I started in stocks about 12 years ago by shoveling money to a hot shot broker working for Raymond James. The only one "broker" was me...to the tune of $80 grand in a year and a half. I figured I could have lost it myself , learned a lot, and saved the fees and commissions, rather than continue ignorantly listening to him. That expert "adviser" was working for the big houses wanting to move stock, not me. I have since figured that out. The hot tips he gave me were nothing more than big board stocks that fund managers were looking to unload. Don't ever let anyone tell you pump and dumps are confined to pinks and OTC's. Maybe the illegal kind are, but not the ones orchestrated on Wall Street.
Anyhow, it's enjoyable seeing a healthy debate unfold like this.
To condense my thoughts...I like the idea of advisers, but in the form of paid private sector advisers...the kind who are at ri$k if their advice turns out to be garbage. Being of Scottish decent, anyone poking the English in the eye has furthered himself with me...LOL.
jc
