The Rabbi
Diamond Member
- Sep 16, 2009
- 67,733
- 7,923
So I am certain people here remember Sarbanes-Oxley, the act passed after Enron to insure financial integrity. Sarbox drove up compliance costs for companies listed on stock exchanges, forcing many of them to go private, discouraged listings in America in favor of listings on European exchanges, and of course did nothing to solve the problem.
But I'll bet every lib here jack will stand up and say "If you want to repeal Sarbox you must be for company fraud!"
Yeah, bullshit.
But stupid laws like that have costs that arent foreseeable.
Like the current Yates case before the Supreme COurt. Sarbox criminalizes destruction of records or other evidence. Now, we all know that means financial records and the like, right?
Nope.
The Yates case involves a man who allegedly thew 3 undersize grouper off his boat to avoid a fine. For that high crime he faced 20 years in prison under Sarbox.
It's an example that shows legislation like that, such as RICO, will get stretched well beyond whatever pol is pushing it. Such things are nothing less than tyranny.
But I'll bet every lib here jack will stand up and say "If you want to repeal Sarbox you must be for company fraud!"
Yeah, bullshit.
But stupid laws like that have costs that arent foreseeable.
Like the current Yates case before the Supreme COurt. Sarbox criminalizes destruction of records or other evidence. Now, we all know that means financial records and the like, right?
Nope.
The Yates case involves a man who allegedly thew 3 undersize grouper off his boat to avoid a fine. For that high crime he faced 20 years in prison under Sarbox.
It's an example that shows legislation like that, such as RICO, will get stretched well beyond whatever pol is pushing it. Such things are nothing less than tyranny.
