How would Ron Paul handle businesses like Enron?

[TIMB0B]

People argue that Enron is a major reason why we need government regulation. Thoughts?

[sailingaway]

The same way Enron WAS handled. By state level fraud laws.

[TIMB0B]

The same way Enron WAS handled. By state level fraud laws.
Yeah, I argued that, but they come back with "...after the damage had already been done."

[specsaregood]

Yeah, I argued that, but they come back with "...after the damage had already been done."

So the suggestion is that somehow fraud be handled somehow before it is committed?

[Freebie]

http://shirtoid.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/dept-of-precrime.jpg

[TIMB0B]

So the suggestion is that somehow fraud be handled somehow before it is committed?

They didn't actually come out and say it, but that's what they believe regulation would have done obviously.

[specsaregood]

They didn't actually come out and say it, but that's what they believe regulation would have done obviously.

but then fraudsters would just violate the regulation.
even with everything in place post enron, they didn't catch the maddoff.

[VBRonPaulFan]

it sounds like whoever you're arguing with believes that passing laws and regulations will make people somehow moral. no matter how many laws or regulations or stipulations or whatever you have in place, people are going to get screwed, robbed, ripped off, etc. the important thing is to punish the guilty parties. you can't pass law after law until everything is rainbows and unicorns. the real world doesn't work that way.

[TIMB0B]

Now they're arguing about environmental issues, and touting the EPA as the end-all-be-all.

[specsaregood]

you can't pass law after law until everything is rainbows and unicorns. the real world doesn't work that way.

:(
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_46XEkx4EPGQ/TMzpRatquJI/AAAAAAAAAKs/bmj4I03uJPU/s1600/Shattered-Dreams1.jpg

[TIMB0B]

Just an FYI, I'm arguing on a sports OT forum. Basically, your average voter that only votes for Ds and Rs.

[RonPaulGetsIt]

Well for starters it was the free market that first identified the fraud. the stock price tanked well before any news came out first. All ther government approved rating agencies still held AAA ratings on their bonds evenn after the stock price crashed.

[TIMB0B]

Well for starters it was the free market that first identified the fraud. the stock price tanked well before any news came out first. All ther government approved rating agencies still held AAA ratings on their bonds evenn after the stock price crashed.

You have a link for that?

[RonPaulGetsIt]

You have a link for that?

I dont but you can google it. There is probably a lot there.

[sailingaway]

Yeah, I argued that, but they come back with "...after the damage had already been done."

They want to get people for pre crime?

How about get rid of the fake feeling of complacency investors have from the SEC and make companies have to satisfy the standards of investers / consumers rather than the easily satisfied captive regulators?

[tsai3904]

There's this investment company called Muddy Waters Research that's been conducting their own due diligence on Chinese companies that are publicly listed in the US. They've already identified five Chinese companies that are fraudulent. The problem is that most investors rely on government regulators like the SEC to verify all the financial information companies release to the public, but regulators like the SEC are usually the last ones to notice any problem because they don't have the same incentives as investors with money on the line to detect fraudulent companies. Without the regulators, more investors will conduct stricter research before they invest in companies.

Check out this article on Muddy Waters:
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/06/09/muddy-waters-research-is-a-thorn-to-some-chinese-companies/

[BlackTerrel]

People argue that Enron is a major reason why we need government regulation. Thoughts?

How did government regulation stop Enron again? It didn't. And it won't.

Here's some facts about a Ron Paul presidency: there will still be Enron's. There will still be crime. Unprotected sex will still get you STD's. And the Hawks still won't win an NBA title.

Shit happens and you can't control everything. A Ron Paul presidency won't mean that we live in a world of sunshine and lollipops. But it will make things better than they are now.

[TIMB0B]

If anyone feels so inclined to spread liberty at the sports forum I'm on, here's the link... w ww.soonerfans.com

Go to OT forum "South Oval"

NOTE: McCain won every single county in Oklahoma in the general election of 2008. There was no third party option, so I don't know how many liberty loving folks reside here. However, there appears to be a bunch of ball washing neocons only because they believe in the "Ron Paul is unelectable" jargon. We just need to sway them.

[tsai3904]

If anyone feels so inclined to spread liberty at the sports forum I'm on, here's the link... w ww.soonerfans.com

I read the posts and it's frustrating how people think that free markets mean you can do anything you want without any consequences. Regulations and laws are two different things. If we got rid of all regulations, there would still be laws against fraud. Enron and their executives committed fraud and would still be charged with or without government regulations. If there were no government regulators overseeing Madoff, he still would have been prosecuted because he committed fraud.

[TIMB0B]

I read the posts and it's frustrating how people think that free markets mean you can do anything you want without any consequences. Regulations and laws are two different things. If we got rid of all regulations, there would still be laws against fraud. Enron and their executives committed fraud and would still be charged with or without government regulations. If there were no government regulators overseeing Madoff, he still would have been prosecuted because he committed fraud.

The sad thing is, most of those posters arguing with me are so-called repubs.

[BucksforPaul]

There are very strict laws against murder in the US yet murder still happens. Ask them what they would do about that?

[vita3]

I wish this movement had a prosecuter who started barking about the real criminals behind 911.

[iamse7en]

If insider trading were legalized and instead regulated by the market, then a company like Enron would not have been able to fraud its investors for so long. Also, it's bureaucracy and government regulation that makes fraud so easy... Accounting rules, top-to-bottom standardization, etc... The market should determine the best and proper way and how to disclose earnings and balance sheets.

[StilesBC]

The market would demand greater transparency if investors weren't placated by state sponsored ratings agencies, implicit and explicit bailouts, and barriers to competition.

But in the end, fraud will still occur with or without government regulation. It is RP's argument that government regulation simply provides another vehicle for fraud to occur (ie. regulatory capture). The Federal government should not be wasting its money on something that can be done by another party - someone that can fail and be replaced if they do a poor job or if the nature of fraud evolves.

[Brian4Liberty]

No one has mentioned the root problem. We live in a corporatocracy. The government does not investigate or prosecute their cronies. The opposite is true. They cover for corporate criminals. They prevent investigations. They bail them out with taxpayer money when their ponsi schemes fail.

Enron failed so spectacularly, and screwed so many people, that there was no choice but for State government to go after them. Bush's Feds would never have persued them. And if no one confesses, there will usually be no prosecution. What makes the Enron and Madoff cases different was the confessions and whistle blowers. Without that, there probably would never have been prosecutions.

What would Ron Paul do differently? Perhaps he wouldn't actively cover up corporate crime.