To put it plainly...

[WeThePeople1911]

Communists are afriad of people who sell things.

They automatically assume that if a group of individuals get together and try to better themselves by free trade and serving the self-interest of others, they are "explioting" people.

expliot this, expliot that , expliot us, thats all I ever hear from commies.

I mean...these are the people who think martha stewart got off easy... :rolleyes:

She did nothing wrong.

[STI]

She did nothing wrong.

Except for insider trading.

Now, on to the actual issue.

I think you should spend some time actually reading about communism. We're (mostly) working class people who don't like having the value produced by our labour being extracted for profit. We're also not huge on the dehumanization of the work world. There's some other stuff we're against.

We're all for people working together for a collective self-interest... that's what communism is!

[KC]

This is about as ignorant as your "Go back to russia" garbage.


Communists are afriad of people who sell things.

No I'm not. Why would I be afraid of them?



They automatically assume that if a group of individuals get together and try to better themselves by free trade and serving the self-interest of others, they are "explioting" people.

They are.



expliot this, expliot that , expliot us, thats all I ever hear from commies.

Because it happens. If that's all you hear from communists then you're not paying attention. In your own damn thread we're not even on that subject. Pay attention.



I mean...these are the people who think martha stewart got off easy... rolleyes.gif


She did get off easy. If I was arrested for insider trading I would've gotten a much worse punishment than what she got.



She did nothing wrong.

Insider trading. That's illegal.

[WeThePeople1911]

I love you guys :D

BTW Illegal doesn't mean wrong.

I dunno, my father owns a business, and he doesn't force his employees to work their. But he pays them well enough, and is kind and respectful enough to them that they choose to work their. They are free to quit at any time and move onto bigger and better thing, like college or a focused career.

No one complains that he is exploiting them, and if they did, they would be free to leave and work for one of his competitors, or start up their own business and be their own explioter...oops, I mean boss.

[Freedom Works]

Insider trading is a victimless crime, thus it should not be "illegal".

[KC]

BTW Illegal doesn't mean wrong.

Ok. How about, she wasn't punished for soing something wrong (as that is subjective); she was punished for doing something illegal (objective).



I dunno, my father owns a business, and he doesn't force his employees to work their. But he pays them well enough, and is kind and respectful enough to them that they choose to work their. They are free to quit at any time and move onto bigger and better thing, like college or a focused career.

No one complains that he is exploiting them, and if they did, they would be free to leave and work for one of his competitors, or start up their own business and be their own explioter...oops, I mean boss.

Just because he's nice doesn't mean that he doesn't do it. He needs to do it. As all businesses do. He needs to make a profit, otherwise he wouldn't have the business. Not many people can afford to start their own business.


Insider trading is a victimless crime, thus it should not be "illegal".

Regardless, it still is and as it is illegal she should be punished just as much as a normal person would. What you or I think don't matter.

[Freedom Works]

Not many people can afford to start their own business.
This is because of the government's regulations and laws, as well as using a paper standerd, inflating the money supply, stealing over 50% of a person's wealth, etc...


Regardless, it still is and as it is illegal she should be punished just as much as a normal person would. What you or I think don't matter.
Silly authoritarian, it does matter. There has to be a complaining party for there to be a legitimate case.

[KC]

This is because of the government's regulations and laws, as well as using a paper standerd, inflating the money supply, stealing over 50% of a person's wealth, etc...


So what? He was saying workers have the option NOW to start their own businesses. I pointed out that many can't afford to. You saying this means that you agree with me.


Silly authoritarian, it does matter. There has to be a complaining party for there to be a legitimate case.

Ok how about this. Since she WAS sentenced, and anybody else that did it and got caught would be sentenced, don't you think she deserves the same punishment as anybody else would get?

[Freedom Works]

So what? He was saying workers have the option NOW to start their own businesses. I pointed out that many can't afford to. You saying this means that you agree with me.
No, it means that the reason many can't afford to is not because of exploitation, but because of extortion by the "government".


Ok how about this. Since she WAS sentenced, and anybody else that did it and got caught would be sentenced, don't you think she deserves the same punishment as anybody else would get?

Uh no. Apply that to slavery:
"Well, we know that slavery is wrong, but since so many are in slavery we should keep putting them in slavery."

[redstar2000]

Wow! A new cappie claim to deal with.

How often does that happen??? :lol:

Insider trading is a victimless crime.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Do you folks understand what insider trading is?

You have advance knowledge of something that's going to dramatically increase or decrease the price of a stock.

If you know the price is going to sharply rise, you buy...from the suckers who don't have that information (if they had the same information that you have, then they wouldn't sell).

If you know the price is going to sharply drop, you sell...to the suckers who pay you a higher price for your shares than they are really worth.

In either direction, you have cheated a whole bunch of people out of serious money.

Capitalists get very upset with other capitalists who cheat...Stewart got off lightly because her theft was relatively small (a few hundred thousand).

One of the important purposes of the capitalist state apparatus is to keep the capitalist class from ripping itself to shreds; the cheating must be kept under control.

It's also necessary to preserve "faith in the stock market" on the part of the "small investor" (sucker). If people had any idea of how over-valued stocks really are, nobody but an idiot would "invest". They'd be better off going to a casino...where the games are honest.

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Publius]

I would like to note that I'm not terribly impressed with my allies.

Statements like "Insider trading is a victimless crime" belie a serious misunderstanding of economics.

[fernando]

I dont know if you should call every other capitalist your ally ;)

[Publius]

I dont know if you should call every other capitalist your ally ;)

I meant it figuratively.

[eukreign]

Whether insider trading is ultimately right or wrong (I think it's perfictly legitimate). Currently our laws are completely contradictory. All that insider trading is is exclusive information. Using this information you can profit or save yourself from loss.

So, while insider trading is illegal (to protect those without the exclusive information). Patents are a corner stone of our economy. Patents are also exclusive information, which you can sell or gain from (at the expense of those who aren't allowed to use this information).

So why is it that patents are ok but insider trading is not ok? They are both types of exclusive information, the only difference is that one you don't know about and the other you may know about but you can't use (unless you loose money to the patent holder, which is basically the same as loosing money on a bad stock).

[Publius]

Whether insider trading is ultimately right or wrong (I think it's perfictly legitimate). Currently our laws are completely contradictory. All that insider trading is is exclusive information. Using this information you can profit or save yourself from loss.

Or you can colloborate with others to speculate a stock to a high price and then drop it, ruining the portfolio's of thousands of innocent investors.

If Grandma invests in a stock being pimped up by a group of insider trades, she can lose her entire savings when the conspirators decide to drop the stock.

How is that fair?

How is that victimless?

It isn't 'exclusive information', it's a pyramid scheme.

If rich investors are allowed to conspire with their buying and selling, the market loses it's original purpose (Do you know what that was?) and becomes a crap shoot where the investors with the most money take ALL the money.



So, while insider trading is illegal (to protect those without the exclusive information). Patents are a corner stone of our economy. Patents are also exclusive information, which you can sell or gain from (at the expense of those who aren't allowed to use this information).

You can't use your patent to take thousands of dollars away from me unless it's one hell of a patent.

It's not an issue of information, it's a matter of fraud.

There is no fundamental difference between 'insider information' and fraud.

Fraud is a form of insider information. For example, I know there is nothing but alcohol and some arsenic in my Snake Oil, you do not.

You purchase it and die, I become rich.

Can I claim that it was just an issue of assemetrical information?

Do you know what fraud is?



So why is it that patents are ok but insider trading is not ok?

Why is that dancing and killing people are not both legal?

Because they're totally unrelated things with drastically different effects.



They are both types of exclusive information, the only difference is that one you don't know about and the other you may know about but you can't use (unless you loose money to the patent holder, which is basically the same as loosing money on a bad stock).

Isn't the presence of poison in a drink just a type of 'exclusive information?

Answer: Of course it is, but I don't think you support it.

[Publius]

Tell me, what is the fundamental difference between insider trading and a company making up it's earnings report to pimp up its stock price?

Should both be allowed?

[Vallegrande]

Is "insider trading" another name for graft? There's a story about the big business owners during the early 1900's, one who is well known from Tammany Hall called Senator Plunkitt. :lol: And he calls it "honest graft". He said there was a difference between honest and dishonest graft. But graft is neither honest or dishonest, it is exploitation! He used future city planning to buy out the land at a cheap cost. And when the city finally started public service on that land, he would be able to reap profits by doubling the cost for people having to buy that land. I think insider trading is just the same, except it is with the stock market.

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2005, 10:19 AM
Tell me, what is the fundamental difference between insider trading and a company making up it's earnings report to pimp up its stock price?

Should both be allowed?
Text of a recent letter to The Economist...


My professor on an accounting course at Harvard Business School 25 years ago introduced it thus: “When most of you read accounting statements now, you do not understand them. At the end of this course, you will not believe them.”

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaySt...tory_id=4269750 (http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=4269750)

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[Commie-Pinko]

Martha Stewert's show was a crime against humanity :)

If I have to watch that one more time on christmas I am gonna go bake you a cake.

[Publius]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2005, 10:34 PM



Text of a recent letter to The Economist...


My professor on an accounting course at Harvard Business School 25 years ago introduced it thus: “When most of you read accounting statements now, you do not understand them. At the end of this course, you will not believe them.”

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaySt...tory_id=4269750 (http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?story_id=4269750)



You know I read the Economist religiously.

Good quote.

I was asking our friend though.

I don't think he would support accounting fraud (How could you?), but I he says he DOES support insider trading, which is roughly the same thing; inflating the worth of the company to goad others into purchasing it's stock, only to sell your inflated stock and leave everyone broke.

There is no real difference between the two.

[Brokor]

Communists have plenty of decent, caring people within their ranks.

Unfortunately, not one of them knows that they are being falsely led to believe that they actually have a working system of government. Some communists even believe that the "stateless" society in its most pure form can justify the means by which all communists aspire, when in reality...only millions upon millions of corpses lie.

Communism was brought to the world in order to pin one class against another, while the controlling government (which really does exist *gasp!*) takes control, grows out of proportion with its civilian populace to the point of corrupt-overload, and then a dictatorship is born. Every time, this has occured, and every time it shall remain.

The ultimate dream of Marx and Engels is a wet dream, nothing more.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Unfortunately, not one of them knows that they are being falsely led to believe that they actually have a working system of government. Some communists even believe that the "stateless" society in its most pure form can justify the means by which all communists aspire, when in reality...only millions upon millions of corpses lie.

How can a form of society kill millions of people when it hasn't yet existed?


Communism was brought to the world in order to pin one class against another, while the controlling government (which really does exist *gasp!*) takes control, grows out of proportion with its civilian populace to the point of corrupt-overload, and then a dictatorship is born. Every time, this has occured, and every time it shall remain.

So spake the LORD™. You really are amusing :lol:


The ultimate dream of Marx and Engels is a wet dream, nothing more.

And the capitalist fantasy of free trade isn't?

[bunk]

To put it plainly..., Unwrapping the commie

What's beneath the wrapper?

[Martin Blank]

Originally posted by WeThePeople1911+Aug 15 2005, 02:29 AM--> (WeThePeople1911 @ Aug 15 2005, 02:29 AM)Communists are afriad of people who sell things.[/b]

Actually, it's the other way around: People who steal what we workers create so they can sell them for personal enrichment are afraid we may take it all back ... with interest.


Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2005, 02:29 AM
They automatically assume that if a group of individuals get together and try to better themselves by free trade and serving the self-interest of others, they are "explioting" people.

expliot this, expliot that , expliot us, thats all I ever hear from commies.

First of all, the word is E-X-P-L-O-I-T -- the placement of the "o" before the "i" is what gives the word "exploit" that "oi" (as in: "Oi! We've got a real 'moran' over here!") sound near the end.

Second, you obviously are ignorant of the communist definition of exploitation.


[email protected] 15 2005, 02:29 AM
I mean...these are the people who think martha stewart got off easy... :rolleyes:

She did nothing wrong.

Well, she did nothing that hasn't been done by countless other capitalist coupon clippers over the years. That's for certain. But then, all of them should have been in jail for their insider trading, speculation and profiteering.

Miles

[CrazyModerate]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2005, 06:29 AM
Communists are afriad of people who sell things.

They automatically assume that if a group of individuals get together and try to better themselves by free trade and serving the self-interest of others, they are "explioting" people.

expliot this, expliot that , expliot us, thats all I ever hear from commies.

I mean...these are the people who think martha stewart got off easy... :rolleyes:

She did nothing wrong.
Oh no. Poor little Martha Stewart.

Its people like George Bush who are getting away with the worst crimes of all.

[jasontkennedy]

Communists have plenty of decent, caring people within their ranks.

Unfortunately, not one of them knows that they are being falsely led to believe that they actually have a working system of government. Some communists even believe that the "stateless" society in its most pure form can justify the means by which all communists aspire, when in reality...only millions upon millions of corpses lie.

Communism was brought to the world in order to pin one class against another, while the controlling government (which really does exist *gasp!*) takes control, grows out of proportion with its civilian populace to the point of corrupt-overload, and then a dictatorship is born. Every time, this has occured, and every time it shall remain.

The ultimate dream of Marx and Engels is a wet dream, nothing more.



:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

What on earth does this have to do with the topic? hAHHAHAHAH
Nice ideological broad arguement right in the middle of a specific practical arguement. Silly cappie. You should have made your own thread, where you'd have been ripped to shreds by some of the veterans around here. But since your statement is in the middle of an unrelated thread, it will likely get no other replies.

Idiots are unbearable.

[Comrade Hector]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2005, 06:54 AM
I dunno, my father owns a business, and he doesn't force his employees to work their. But he pays them well enough, and is kind and respectful enough to them that they choose to work their. They are free to quit at any time and move onto bigger and better thing, like college or a focused career.
Tiny businesses don't have quite the same effect on workers as the big corporations.

[The Sloth]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2005, 06:29 AM
Communists are afriad of people who sell things.

They automatically assume that if a group of individuals get together and try to better themselves by free trade and serving the self-interest of others, they are "explioting" people.

expliot this, expliot that , expliot us, thats all I ever hear from commies.

I mean...these are the people who think martha stewart got off easy... :rolleyes:

She did nothing wrong.
i'm not scared of people selling shit. if i see them selling shit, and i like it, i'll simply take it off of their hands, and pound them a "thank you" for letting me not pay for it.

































































...kidding.