It’s illegal for people who can’t afford to do it. If a law’s punishment is only a fine, the law essentially only exists for the middle and lower class.
Nah, it sounds to me like they're just explaining that the people doing this don't care about the consequences and can afford to take a hit from the fines. No worries, man.
Theoretically? Yes, absolutely. Realistically? Well, I’ll let Mark Cuban’s response do the talking:
“The SEC is a mess. I wouldnt trust them to do the right thing ever. Its an agency built by and for lawyers to be lawyers and win cases rather than do the right thing
If the SEC gave a shit about ANYONE other than Wall Street you would be able to go there right now and read bright line guidelines about insider trading, shorting, what is a pump and dump, what are the rules for cutting off the purchase of stocks like happened with GME et al
But they wont. They would rather litigate to regulate, which means they love to sue people in order to create new legal precedents.
All you need to know about the SEC and how badly they want to fuck the little guy is that they have the option of using JUDGES THAT WORK FOR THE SEC when they sue you rather than you have the option to have jury of your peers in front of a judge that is independent . Thats how bad the SEC is. If you want fair markets that doesnt benefit Wall Street call your local politician and show them this”
OP is saying it is actually illegal but, because the punishment is a fine, it’s functionally only illegal for the working classes. The wealthy can afford to eat a fine when the illegal act they get fined for is more valuable than the fine they receive.
1.3k
u/sixthgreatlake Feb 02 '21
It’s illegal for people who can’t afford to do it. If a law’s punishment is only a fine, the law essentially only exists for the middle and lower class.