Originally posted by ModernAcademia
The worse part of this is most people will read this and want more regulation
That will just empower the crooks even more
Most people have no understanding what regulation is all about
I watched the entire 60 minutes episode and I think that most of us here understand that regulations are put in place to protect the environment and
general public from being abused, cheated, polluted, etc... by those who would otherwise commit these acts, usually with "profit" being the motive.
For you to say that this mortgage fraud was actually a conspiracy against de-regulation is IMO, a joke. I'm not saying that all regulation is good,
but it's definitely not all bad either and I believe that most of the federal & state regulations serve a useful purpose. If a company can't drill
for oil without polluting, then don't allow them to drill!!! If a bank can't seem to make money without cheating people out of their homes, then
don't allow them to bank!!! If humans can't safely operate motor vehicles while intoxicated, then don't allow them to drink and drive!!! Really
seems pretty simple to me.
(edit) IMO, it's not the regulations that are the problem, it's a total lack of enforcement and accountability that is the real problem. More people
need to go to jail for what they've done! (edit)
Also, I don't remember any mention of this fraud being a scheme to stop deregulation, at least not in the episode of 60 minutes that I watched on
Sunday night. For me, the most disturbing part of the whole episode was when the justice dept. official explained that, First; he had never heard of
this whistleblower and/or her accusations regarding Countrywide and Secondly; that it was extremely hard to prove "intent," which was needed in order
to secure a conviction and that most cases were never prosecuted because of this.
The real problem is that these people are not being prosecuted at all and that was the main jest of the 60 minutes segment. Personally, I would
prefer to see the prosecutor, (at some point prior to the expiration of the statute of limitations) attempt to convict them and fail, than to not try
them at all. Furthermore, I believe that in our current economic environment, he may find it's easier to convince a jury of intent than he has
experienced in past cases.
Anyway, you're definitely entitled to your own opinion and I would never want to get in the way of that so "good luck" with your "Anti-Deregulation
edit on 6-12-2011 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)