Social Question

philosopher's avatar

Why are Congressmen/women allowed to engage in insider trading?

Asked by philosopher (9165points) November 14th, 2011

This makes me sick to my stomach. It clearly demonstrates that both parties are morally corrupt. We have No Leadership or Representation. Are elected officials steal all they can from us.
The book is called Throw Them All Out. LOL I say that all the time.
Can you all approach this in a nonpartisan matter? Both parties are gulity. They should have to give it back and pay down the debt.
How do we punish them?

See link.
http://www.upi.com/Top_ News/US/2011/11/14/CBS- Insider-trading-OK-for- Congress/UPI-4147132126 3000/

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

22 Answers

zenvelo's avatar

Because Congress wrote the rules and the exemptions. I was shocked watching 60 Minutes last night that they are even allowed to actively trade; the Executive and Judiciary has to put everything into blind trusts..

Coloma's avatar

Can you really be surprised? lol
Sociopaths rule the world. I have long said it’s time for a brand new SPECIES in office, like my goose Marwyn.

“Marwyn for president” let them eat bread and swimming pools for all! ”

philosopher's avatar

@zenvelo
@Coloma
I hope my asking this gets people thinking. Too many people remain passive and never speak up.

Coloma's avatar

@philosopher Got’cha…just being my usual silly goose self, I dunno…it seems to me that regardless of provocative thought the salmon is fighting a losing upstream battle. ;-)

philosopher's avatar

@Coloma
I am a fighter because life has not given me much choice. People should never behave like Sheep. Doing so has gotten us here.

Coloma's avatar

@philosopher

Well…while that is true, it is also true that we all pick our poison so to speak.
I’m the old broad these days, I’m retired from the fight. Wore myslef out in the 70’s and 80’s. lol

philosopher's avatar

@Coloma
My husband recently retried.
The fight is not over as long as we live because the thefts are every place, I fight for my autistic son.

Coloma's avatar

@philosopher Don’t get me wrong, I just choose to put my energies into areas aside from politics. There are more than enough “causes” to go around. ;-)

philosopher's avatar

@Coloma
I understand and I feel similar. I am angry because they all steal from us. They Scape Goat various segements of society for our Economy. They are to blame and they have No moral right to cut programs that help autistic people but; they are trying.
I have to pay attention because ignorance is not bliss.

Coloma's avatar

@philosopher

I agree, we all choose to pursue what is dear to our hearts. :-)

SavoirFaire's avatar

Strictly speaking, they are not allowed to engage in insider trading. It is against the House of Representatives’ ethics rules to use information they get in the course of their duties for financial gain. The problem is that it is not illegal for them to use that information to engage in insider trading. That is, the only sanctions they can receive are those their fellows are willing to levy against them.

Yes, they should be punished. Each and every one of them should be investigated by the ethics committee, and they should pass a law that makes it illegal—and not just unethical—for this kind of insider trading to occur. But will it happen? All signs point to “no.”

cazzie's avatar

It is perfectly allowed in a fascist country. I’m with @Coloma. Why is anyone surprised?

GracieT's avatar

I agree with @SavoirFaire, it makes me sick. But I also agree with @philosopher. Too many people are like sheep. To many of us are just not interested in making waves. It is too difficult. Today I received a piece of mail that made me laugh, (and laugh, and laugh!) it was sent by the US congress esp Democrats (I usually am more close to Democrats than Republicans). Asking me about my income if I had to depend on SSI alone. Thank God I don’t because I only recieve less than $700.00 a month. I find it rather interesting how quick they are to say “We understand” when you know they have ABSOLUTELY no idea how it is. The older I get the more disgusted I become.

philosopher's avatar

@GracieT @SavoirFaire
How do we make the sheep understand that they must start advocating for the working American people? That the people created America to get away from the unethical Elitist.
If people do not stand up for themselves the bullies take over.
Congress, the extremist, Lobbyist, China and other bullies are destroying America.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@philosopher What do you think Occupy Wall Street is? It’s people standing up, and making the case for others to do the same. You convince others to stand up by doing it first.

philosopher's avatar

@SavoirFaire
I agree but they lack leadership. I wish they had Leadership. I wish they had a leader running for President.
The movement is a great idea but Archaist infiltrate protest and the disorganization makes them vulnerable.
Some of the people there are Middle class working people who care about America but; some wish to cause trouble for others. Violence and disturbing other people 24/7 will not make them popular. Blomberg shut down the park in NYC for cleaning yesterday. They will not be allowed to Camp out in the park anymore.
I want the movement to be successful in forcing the Elitist to hear the demands of the Middle Class but to that they need strong Leadership.
My friend from other another site sent me a link check this out.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/can-anyone-name-one-leaderless-movement-that-has-s/
Kraven posted my question there.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@philosopher I disagree that they need leadership, or at least that they need more leadership than they already have. The movement does have organizers, after all, even if they have no official positions of power. The question to which you linked asks for successful movements that did not have a leader. Several examples have already been given there—the women’s suffrage movement, the anti-Vietnam War movement, the civil rights movement, unionization—but we could add the Arab Spring movements that inspired Occupy Wall Street.

Personally, I think a spontaneous mass uprising is exactly what we need. That no one is in charge shows that—regardless of whether you think they’re right or wrong—the movement represents the genuine sentiments of those involved. OWS can’t have a leader, and it can’t run anybody for office. It’s not like the Tea Party in that way; no single person could represent it. What it can do, however, is make the concerns of a significant portion of the American population—including a significant portion of the voting American population—part of the national conversation.

philosopher's avatar

@SavoirFaire
Tonight I heard on CBS Evening News that some people believe they will eventually succeed as the Civil Rights Movement did but they did have Leadership.
You need Leadership, organization and clear goals.
I hope the goals that matter succeed but there are trouble makers that cause unnecessary problems.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@philosopher The civil rights movement did not have a leader. It had organizers who we have retroactively dubbed leaders because history showed them to be important. They have organization, and they have some goals. The movement is quite new, though, so larger and more specific goals may develop. The civil rights movement didn’t begin in a crystalized form, either.

philosopher's avatar

@SavoirFaire
This is my question that Kraven reposted.
Why don’t the Protesters on Wall Street have a Leader running for President? Someone who opposes violence and advocates for the Middle Class?
The Civil Rights movement did take time and Leadership did develop.
The Wall street movement lacks a clear strategy or goal. Most American’s support a large part of what they say. The problem is we oppose violence and the Anarchist. I am frustrated by this. I distrust some of the people that seem to hang out down there. The goal should be to improve things for most people.Not to disturb or make things harder for people that must get to work to survive. This will hurt the cause if, they are see this way.
I am unsure about the Demonstrations for today in NYC. They must comprehend that people are trying to make them look bad.
I wish to support them but I must know what they want. Many people feel as I do.

SavoirFaire's avatar

@philosopher I understand your question, and I think I have answered it. You ask why the Occupy movement doesn’t have a leader running for president. The answer is because it can’t have a leader, and it can’t run anybody for office. It’s not like the Tea Party in that way; no single person could represent it. This prevents the movement from being co-opted and asks other people to take up the cause rather than the name. It’s a harder road to travel, but it’s more effective if it works.

Yes, the civil rights movement did take time; the Occupy movement will also take time. You say that the civil rights movement developed leadership, but I disagree. I would say that it developed major organizers. That is a leadership of sorts, of course, but that can’t be what you are talking about because Occupy already has that. They don’t have any figures as large as Martin Luther King, Jr. yet, but it is early.

OWS does have a clear strategy: sit-ins and occupations. They are using the strategy that worked for the Arab Spring. They do not have a single, overarching goal, but they do have several small goals. Big changes are the result of little changes. Let it be.

As for violence and anarchism, I do not understand what you are saying. Occupy has not been violent, and it is not anarchist. Even if there are a few who are bad apples, that can be said of any group anywhere at any time. When I see the events in Oakland and UC Davis, however, I myself stop being opposed to violent reactions. But as most Americans still want them to be moral saints, I suppose they’ll have to behave a bit longer.

Every movement faces people who try to make them look bad. This is inevitable. I’m not sure why you think Occupy should be held to a standard to which no other movement in history has been held. It is our duty as citizens to figure out who really does and does not represent Occupy. But at the end of the day, even that doesn’t matter. Our real duty is to examine their views—independent of who is putting them forward and how they might be going about it—and to figure out how much truth there is in it.

The point of Occupy is to bring the problem to the foreground and not let the country ignore it. Our job is to do something about it. Otherwise, we’re just another group of people waiting for someone to tell us what to do. Perhaps it’s time for the people—and not just groups of protesters—to get off their asses and do something.

philosopher's avatar

@SavoirFaire
I am not naive but I dislike the methods used in the Middle East. They seem to think life is not very important.
I hope change can happen without Riots in the streets. It could if Congress and the Elitist were afraid.
I support Israel and I dislike those who placate Terrorist. I dislike R Wingers who think think the wealthiest should pay No Taxes and we should all be slaves.
I do not support either party. I support documentation and common sense.
I distrust some of the people in this movement and I wish I did not. I love America. I hate violence.
You are entitled to your beliefs but I do not agree.
Change happen here after the Hay Market Riots, other events and Unions helped. The R would like to take it all back.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther