This would do that, but not like how you are thinking. The partners or owners would be directly responsible for the business. This would guarantee even more so that partnerships and businesses would be given full Constitutional rights because there would be no distinction between the business and its owners.
I agree there would have to be some significant changes to rebalance the risk. There are already certain avenues to limit liability, for example, the limited partnership. In this case, you give up day-today control in exchange for the freedom to be limited to the amount of your investment. If you do exert any control over the business, you would than become fully liable. This works well because the people who are making the decisions about how to run the company have their personal assets on the line whereas the typical investor does not.
I like your analogy, mind if I corrupt it? I continue to Imagine SEC giving me a back rub, cooking my breakfast and someone who goes on long and frequent vacations. Regulations are the public's definition that equates to imposing some sort of morality into the financial institutions. It is encompassing of not just the right laws and guidelines but enforcement and discovery.
What IS funny though is how they instantly connect these Muslims that are complaining to the obviously guilty wallstreet.Basically we said in a reverse fashion, that the Muslims are complaining only because they are guilty.I love it!
Closed AccountApr 19, 2010
This isn't so much funny as it is sad
ltgeyserApr 19, 2010
The comic already made that joke.
timthetaxmanApr 19, 2010
This would do that, but not like how you are thinking. The partners or owners would be directly responsible for the business. This would guarantee even more so that partnerships and businesses would be given full Constitutional rights because there would be no distinction between the business and its owners.
timthetaxmanApr 19, 2010
What do you find wrong with what I've said.
timthetaxmanApr 19, 2010
I agree there would have to be some significant changes to rebalance the risk. There are already certain avenues to limit liability, for example, the limited partnership. In this case, you give up day-today control in exchange for the freedom to be limited to the amount of your investment. If you do exert any control over the business, you would than become fully liable. This works well because the people who are making the decisions about how to run the company have their personal assets on the line whereas the typical investor does not.
inajeepApr 19, 2010
I like your analogy, mind if I corrupt it? I continue to Imagine SEC giving me a back rub, cooking my breakfast and someone who goes on long and frequent vacations. Regulations are the public's definition that equates to imposing some sort of morality into the financial institutions. It is encompassing of not just the right laws and guidelines but enforcement and discovery.
acidtonicApr 19, 2010
What IS funny though is how they instantly connect these Muslims that are complaining to the obviously guilty wallstreet.Basically we said in a reverse fashion, that the Muslims are complaining only because they are guilty.I love it!
ltgeyserApr 20, 2010
Also, to whoever's burying me, suck it.