[citation][nom]ubercake[/nom]Too many 'little people' must have made too much money. When that happens, the SEC is there to put a stop to such a distribution of wealth. The proper channels meaning to let politicians know first as they are immune to insider trading laws.[/citation]
I'd just like to explain to anyone who might wonder about the above comment that, in fact, nothing like the situation therein described ever happens. No one has ever accused the SEC of being particularly effective in ANY of its enforcement roles, and there's certainly no Robin Hood angle to this story. It's not as if some public Facebook post were a font of free money and that mean old scary government moved in to shut it down at the behest of shadowy overlords. Here in America, the financial overlords are right there in your face, and their agendas are perfectly clear and public.
When the SEC does go after somebody, it is never a "little person", and it's certainly never a benevolent insider who was spreading wealth to "little people." Because real insiders are inevitably out to enrich themselves.
In what way were "little people" making money? In no way. What are some times the SEC has somehow stopped a (downward) redistribution of wealth? There are none. In what way are politicians immune to prosecution? They aren't. What insider trading are you talking about? Wall street doesn't give politicians secret stock tips; wall street publicly donate cash money and hooks politicians up with very sweet.jobs when they leave office.
I'm just sayin'.