g with their money? Wouldn't a transparent economy benefit all of us? Or is it necessary for secrecy to survive democracy?
2007-08-16 13:41:10 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Business & Finance ➔ Investing
In this age of information, I can't imagine that it would be that aweful hard to computerize all transactions through the SEC.
I think it would benefit society, by removing opportunity hunting from the lower classes. They could just follow the leader?!
The very rich and profitable persons and organizations would be readily identified and could be followed by anyone or mimiced.
This would allow governments to keep tabs on terrorism too, as well as citizens.
2007-08-18 00:12:28 · update #1
Aren't we in the computer age? What is to stop it? What is to say it is not being done right now? And if it is, the info is in the hands of a few priviliged people that can destroy your life without anyone else knowing?! So wouldn't it be better to be completely transparent?
2007-08-18 00:15:09 · update #2
Have you ever sorted database files by numbers? We could sort the data in our own computers or online to provide information on the largest investors? What is the big deal? I would think, once this momentary info is available online, anyone can do it! Is it that intimidating for people to know each other's finances? Ownership, belongings, money and money's path? What is to hide, unless someone does not feel worthy of their money? In that case give it up to someone you feel is worthy.
I just think transparency would be what we all want. If you are funnelling money to terrorists, organizations that want most of us dead, then you should be chastised for that, right?
Aren't we in the computer age? What is to stop it? What is to say it is not being done right now? And if it is, the info is in the hands of a few priviliged people that can destroy your life without anyone else knowing?! So wouldn't it be better to be completely transparent?
2007-08-18 00:20:10 · update #3
But yeah...many programs have that sort function. I would be sorting on the larger figures first. I think it would be great, because a democratic society could have free unpaid auditors, visa vie , watch dogs....a neighborhood monetary watchdog that pays attention to where you spend your money!
Right now there are agencies in the federal government paid to do that, but they are like the fox guarding the henhouse. Their purpose is to keep the little guy at bay.
In a democracy, isn't the little guy supposed to count some?
2007-08-18 00:23:07 · update #4
No - there would be no value to that, and the government has no right to cross that line into violating an individual's privacy.
2007-08-16 13:47:25 · answer #1 · answered by moleary1018 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
First no one in the world has centralized knowledge of what investors are doing. Even the exchanges don't know, although there is some knowledge by the exchange regulators of what certain large investors are doing, such as the Bank of Japan or Warren Buffett.
A transparent economy would benefit no one. What does matter is effective enforcement of property rights.
2007-08-17 10:48:59 · answer #2 · answered by OPM 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First, the fed doesn't have anything to do with individual investors. You may be thinking of the SEC.
Second, it's no body's business what I'm doing.
Just think about how stupid this is. Wouldn't you be required to tell me how much you make at your job? How much you have in savings? If transparency is such a good thing why don't you go first and tell all of us here and now.
2007-08-16 20:58:24 · answer #3 · answered by Oh Boy! 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Umm. Almost every person in the US is an investor. You want the government to try to report every move they all mak?
That is a really bad suggestion. Nothing to do with secrecy or transparency, just absolutely un-doable.
2007-08-16 20:56:58 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not a matter of secrecy. People do have a right to privacy, and I don't want to live in a country where there is no such right.
Additionally, how would you propose implementing this? Just technically, would be next to impossible if not totally impossible. And then how would you, in your curiousity, wade through the zillions of entries on this list of transactions?
2007-08-16 20:47:02 · answer #5 · answered by Judy 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
First, the Fed does not know what each investor is doing, so it could not reveal it.
Second, this would also reveal who has how much money, and most persons do not want the amount of money that they have revealed to everyone else.
2007-08-16 20:45:43 · answer #6 · answered by StephenWeinstein 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's not the way it works. If an investor puts his/her own private funds into a private company, what business is that of the government?
2007-08-16 20:53:02 · answer #7 · answered by fredrick z 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Just plain wrong. The basic premise is wrong. There's nowhere to go with this question. Sorry.
2007-08-16 22:56:10 · answer #8 · answered by Common Sense 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋