Martha Stewart Resigns

CNN ^

[RoughDobermann]

NEWS ALERT Martha Stewart resigns as CEO of her company after indictment on obstruction of justice and securities fraud charges. Details soon.

[ewing]

(lol)Will all of the Upper East Side Social Matrons take Martha into their homes while she is hiding from the law! Providing her with food and decorating supplies of course..

[george wythe]

. Being pursued by the federal government for doing something that isn't wrong is even worse.

This is a great example of the power of the federal government.

God forbid I'm ever on the receiving end of an FBI probe; I may lose my business, my home, and maybe more, trying to raise enough money to hire the lawyers and experts required to fend off FBI accusations.

[wizzler]

It's a commodity that's not available to all. If trust in the markets falls off we are screwed.

But what makes you think that commodity -- or ANY commodity -- should be "available to all"? What you're advocating, albeit unwittingly, is a sort of socialism. You essentially want the government to maintain a kind of central control of the marketplace.

The fact that some people in some situations have some information that some other people don't have -- that does nothing to erode anyone's "trust" in the market. You want the same inside info Martha Stewart gets? Get yourself into her position. Can't get there because you don't have the right luck or the right skills or the right whatever? Too bad. Freedom doesn't guarantee success. Freedom simply guarantees freedom. And that's all that matters.

[wizzler]

The market isn't free if there is insider trading.

Explain why you believe this is so.

I swear, sometimes I'm astounded this place is called "conservative."

[RGSpincich]

The answer is Sammy Sosa and Martha Stewart.

Alex, what are institutions that dissolve overnight?

[nhoward14]

What you are saying is asinine. Since investors are putting up capital to operate the company that is being run for the benefit of the shareholders by company officers and directors, it is morally wrong for such directors to inform one class of shareholders of pertinent information while concealing or delaying the release of the same information to another class of shareholder.

[HighWheeler]

When she is found guilty, the judge should force her to sell all of her stocks that week, and not be able to participate in the stock market for 3 years. Include her MSO stock.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

[leprechaun9]

I keep getting this gut feeling that she forgot to tip off one of her well connected friends, who lost a lot of money!

The money trail should be pursued, who lost the most?

[RedBloodedAmerican]

If there is insider trading, then those who are trading CONTROL the market value of that particular stock, and therefore, it isn't free. At least, that is the way it appears to be. What part of this would you not agree with? Do you think insider trading is an honest practice?

[nhoward14]

Then what does a share of stock in a company buy you? If you can afford 1 million shares you have a better chance to know what is happening than someone who can only afford 1000 shares?

[RightWhale]

Explain why you believe this is so.

This was tried with the Chicago grain futures market. They had to institute rules and controls one after another to try to keep the market free. Too many insider deals were destroying the market, and commerce relied on the market. The market fails, commerce fails, farming fails, and the whole system collapses. Apocalyptical? Not at all, it's the real world.

[JLO]

LOL, wizzler - tee,hee! LOL is just a shorthand for Laughing Out Loud, used all over message boards everywhere.

[ewing]

[wizzler]

Um, thanks, JLO.

[Political Junkie Too]

But what makes you think that commodity -- or ANY commodity -- should be "available to all"?

If you're asking me for some of my property (money) as an investment to improve your property (the company) with the intent that my property will be converted into a share of your property, but you secretly know that your property is about to lose its value and you don't tell me, but you do tell others who have previously invested to get out while still telling me to get in, then you are dealining in insider trading, which is also fraud (a fraud of omission to the outsiders).

The fact that some people in some situations have some information that some other people don't have -- that does nothing to erode anyone's "trust" in the market.

The "information" is your intent to take certain actions, or your knowledge of someone else's intent to take actions, or actions already taken but unknown to most, not a rumor heard on the street.

-PJ

[wizzler]

I'm not staking out some novel or unique position here. Plenty of free-marketeers and liberty-lovers find laws against "insider trading" to be a farce.

As Reason's Brian Doherty wrote on this subject: "Spreading information about a company that might affect its stock price should not be considered any more inherently unfair, illegal, or bad for the economy than tipping someone off about a forthcoming job opening." (http://reason.com/hod/bd062502.shtml)

And as Ilana Mercer wrote at World Net Daily -- you know, that place where actual conservatives hang out -- "Absent a moral obligation to divulge information, criminal charges are a grotesque overreach, a position emphatically reiterated in the Supreme Court's recent decisions. The Supreme Court has maintained that 'there is no duty to disclose nonpublic information.' " (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28003)

[wizzler]

But nobody ever knows that a property is about to lose value. NOBODY. Everyone involved in the market makes educated guesses and hopes for the best. Some guesses are more "educated" than others. Your lack of information in the securities market is no more my burden than your (hypothetical, of course) lack of good looks in the mating market.

[smith288]

Ok, Ok, lust has taken over here. I STILL LOVE HER.

Something about this lady that has class and a nice a@@.

I hope you are in the wrong thread and talking about someone else rather than Stewart

[Political Junkie Too]

Perhaps, if you're talking about two passive investors. But if you're talking about an investor and the CEO, then one of them has vast knowledge that the property is about to lose value. The CEO who tells his pals to get out is not guessing like the passive investor is, nor are his pals.

-PJ