|
Word Count: 946 Perhaps Walter Williams and I are the only two people on earth who can see
the hypocrisy of insider trading laws. I somehow doubt it, though. Williams
wrote a column about a year ago, lambasting these laws and I'm going to pick up
where he left off. These laws run counter the notion we accept in every other
aspect of society that life is unfair. In every facet of life, there are people
who have access to advantages that others do not have. However, we don't attempt
to make these advantages illegal except when it comes to insider trading.
I've often heard the argument that it is not so much about fairness as it is
about trust of the system, i.e., that people will not invest their money knowing
that others have advantages they don't have themselves. Baloney! The advantages
people have in other things do not cause those without these advantages to not
participate. I will cite several examples to show how the lack of similar laws
in other aspects of life does not cause any real problems. They will also show
how hypocritical it is to create special laws just for the world of investment
and not apply the same logic anywhere else.
Let's look at fraternities, sororities, and other private clubs and
organizations. It's completely legal to join them even though many of them are
exclusive in nature and do not allow just anyone to join. Of course, this right
is covered by the freedom of association guarantees in the U.S. Constitution.
However, being a member often gains a person access to benefits that he or she
wouldn't have by not being a member. One of these benefits is access to
desirable high-level positions within major corporations. Many of these
positions are not available to non-members. That's not fair but I have yet to
see a law against it. Despite that, people still apply for good jobs within
corporations every day. They don't sit on the sidelines and not apply just
because they believe the insiders are getting all the best positions.
What about inherited wealth? It's not fair for someone to take advantage of
their inherited wealth when most people don't have this kind of access. However,
it's perfectly legal. Many people with inherited wealth have a brand new car
given to them as soon as they are old enough to drive. They have their college
tuition paid for. They usually have a nice cushy job awaiting them when their
college days are over, regardless of how well (or poorly) they performed
academically. They don't even have to work at all if they don't want to. How can
this be fair when many other people have to work for everything they get? Until
there are laws against it, everyone else will refuse to go to college, work, or
pay for anything they get, right? Wrong! Most people realize that there are
people with inherited wealth who don't have to work for anything. People accept
that as a fact of life and go on with their lives. They go to college (for which
they have to most of the tuition themselves), go to work, and pay their bills
every day. Life goes on and no fairness laws are needed here.
What about people who are attractive and/or have charming personalities?
Having these assets is just fine, but it's unfair for people to use them for
personal gain when others like me, who are ugly and blunt, don't have this
privilege. However, I've never heard of any attempt (in this country anyway) to
make a law against using good looks and positive personality traits to one's
advantage. People use these assets to help them land desirable jobs and work
their way up the corporate ladder. They use these assets to help them win
friends and get favors the rest of us can't get. They use these assets to
attract higher quality mates than those of us who are lacking can attract. How
does this make the rest of us feel? It makes us feel so discouraged that we
never apply for a job, attempt to make friends, or perform any normal daily
activity, right? Of course not, that would be silly. We go on with our lives
just like the folks with the good looks and charming personalities. We are not
going to sit out on life, waiting for laws to be passed to restrain all the
pretty and charming people from getting a better deal in life.
I could go on and on, of course, but it seems to me that if insider trading
is illegal because of the unfairness aspect, we ought to outlaw all other forms
of unfairness as well. Sure, insider trading is unfair and very unethical.
However, I doubt that the lack of laws against it would cause the markets to
collapse. Other areas of our daily lives have not collapsed under the weight of
unfairness that legally occurs every day. Also, when we outlaw some forms of
unfairness while ignoring or even encouraging other forms of it (some of which
are just as unethical), isn't that in itself unfair?
About The Author
Terry Mitchell is a software engineer, freelance writer, and trivia buff from
Hopewell, VA. He also serves as a political columnist for American Daily and
operates his own website -
http://www.commenterry.com - on which he posts commentaries on various
subjects such as politics, technology, religion, health and well-being, personal
finance, and sports. His commentaries offer a unique point of view that is not
often found in mainstream media.
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Article Source: www.webraydian.com
|