DD Support Board and Research Team

[loanranger]

I must admit that it's challenging to respond to a post that begins like this:
"No."
Especially when the post to which that utterance is a reply did not ask a question that called for a yes or no answer. It's almost Cesar Millan-like.

That's ok. The rest of the post was far more well thought out than mine. I guess I'm hung up on the personal responsibility thing and grow concerned when I feel that changes are proposed to accommodate a lack of it.

I was not aware that the SEC was "self-supporting", but I think that bears examination. This 2009 document absolutely supports the premise that the SEC brings in more than it costs, a good deal more.:
http://www.sec.gov/about/secfy09congbudgjust.pdf
1. By that measure, the IRS is also "self-supporting". I expect your state's DMV is, as well. The point is that the term "self-supporting" has no place here. The costs of operating the IRS, DMV and SEC have nothing to do with the revenues that they collect, or charge, in terms of evaluating the effectiveness or actual need for those costs. Costs and revenues/collections should be considered independently and don't stand as justification for each other. These are obviously not businesses.
2. Again, please forgive the half-baked research, but yesterdays trading in the Pinks and Other Otc's, AKA the non-reporting companies, was about $320million. So the SEC budget currently under discussion represents a bit more than the value of three days worth of trading in this segment of the market only. Obviously these numbers have nothing to do with each other, but they provide an interesting perspective. On their face, they seem to suggest that the SEC is vastly underfunded. And they also seem to suggest that the market segment that you want to mess with is no small potatoes.

I have to go, but I think that the biggest problem I have with the basis for your proposal is in this paragraph, but it is primarily philosophical and I can't address it now:
"You are right that government can not (and should not, IMO) protect the citizens from themselves. But, they can (and should, IMO) require private enterprise to provide the tools necessary for people to at least be able to make informed decisions and protect themselves. Even the lottery provides players with the odds of winning right on the ticket, as well as providing at least some economic benefits. Non-reporting Pink Sheet companies provide none of this information. Some even provide less than even that by providing clearly fraudulent disclosure and financial statements on Pink OTC."