Replies to post #20328 on First Bitcoin Capital Corp (BITCF)

[janice shell]

I think this goes to the heart of the matter:

First, of course, the SEC wants approval from its congressional overseers and from the general public.

It doesn't just "want" approval from Congress. It must have it, because its budget depends upon it. In the present climate, Congress tends to frown on regulation, but neither does it want to see blatant crooks get away with what they do, because that pisses off the public. So measures that might prevent fraud aren't really encouraged, but vigorous enforcement actions against bigtime perps are.

And of course it's those actions that result in settlements or judgments the perps actually pay, because they want to stay in business. Congress is pretty ignorant where penny stocks are concerned. It seems to confuse them with "small business", which naturally is "the backbone of our economy". So the SEC shrugs; pennies are already a low priority for Enforcement.

As to bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, the SEC is trying to get a grip on it now. Obviously they should have started earlier. We have yet to find out what Congress thinks of cryptocurrencies, but I'd be willing to bet hardly any of them have a good understanding of the issue.

And finally, priorities at the SEC shift with every change in administration. New Chairmen invariably want to concentrate on different things, and have their own pet projects. That, no doubt, can make life difficult for people in the field who deal with day-to-day issues.

[planetaryfuture]

SEC Saddled With Chilling History Of "Slipshod" Regulatory-Policy .....

The author of this historical information admittedly wants to portray a positive image with respect to SEC personnel and the regulatory agency ..... though he feels compelled to admit to significant SEC lapses of regulatory awareness and failure to take action in time to avoid catastrophic consequences ..... And this applies to major "players" instrumental in the economic "meltdown" of 2008 ..... It´s nice to have the luxury of such a generous outlook .....

This information continues for many more pages which I hope to find sufficient time to more comprehensively digest ..... though I still wonder about unanswered allegations relative to the SEC having destroyed 15,000 of their own "Matters Under Investigation" files .... and their refusal to provide information to Senator Grassley after repeated requests during the Madoff-era .....

If the SEC has finally become virtuous and responsible ..... then what prompted the change and when ? ..... I find no reason to trust "blind faith" in an opaque regulatory culture seemingly lacking oversight and accountability ..... alleging nothing more than tightly sequestered "concerns" as adequate grounds for a "Trading Suspension" .....

Should one logically assume ..... based upon past allegd SEC behavior ..... the "MUI" files will continue to be destroyed before judicial satisfaction can be resolved ?..... Is there an updated perspective ? ..... Congress appears to be "asleep at the wheel" and distracted ..... as usual .....

From the .....

Yale Law School

Yale Law School Legal Scholarship Repository

Faculty Scholarship Series Yale Law School Faculty Scholarship 1-1-2010

The Distorting Incentives Facing the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission

Jonathan R. Macey

  
.... Nonetheless, the SEC is virtually untouched by scandal. This
fact is in keeping with the argument, advanced in this Article, that
the SEC as an institution, and its staff as individuals, are both pro-
fessionally ambitious and ethically honest. Because corruption
weakens the future mobility of SEC personnel, it is highly costly
and studiously avoided. In this narrow context, at least, the SEC’s
response to incentives has produced positive social results.

At the same time, there have been significant, ongoing, and
valid criticisms of the SEC’s performance over the past decade.
These criticisms became very loud when the SEC failed to rec-
ognize the fraud and attendant abuses at Enron in 2001, shortly
followed by similar problems at Adelphia, WorldCom, Global Crossings, Tyco, and a host of other companies. Only months later, Eliot Spitzer issued scathing attacks on the SEC’s dismal performance in regulating mutual fund abuses.3 This was followed by the SEC’s failure to respond to, or even to comprehend, the excessive risk-taking at Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, and other broker-dealer firms. The parade of shortcomings ended most recently with the SEC’s failure to respond to glaring warnings about the massive fraud of Bernie Madoff.

http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2342&context=fss_papers

Best Wishes