Nice...

 

Classic!!!

 

Jack. My friend Brant has taken the words out of my mouth. Indeed 30K is nothing in the scope of her total wealth but it was enough for her to turn her back on honest behaviour and 'steal' from those who bought her shares without her inside knowledge.

There *are* ethical businesspeople out there. Stewart is apparently not one.

Lay... yeah that freaks me a bit too. People who rob banks don't get to keep there 'earnings'. Peepls like Lay and Stewart need to be penalized where it really hurts these money grubbers... in the bank book.

 

Use the money to pay for Healthcare for those who can't afford and public education.

No that's not socialism... not if it means the honest taxpayer doesn't have to foot the bill.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you. I just thought your earlier description (stealing from working people's retirement account) sounded more like Lay than Stewart. And I certainly am not defending insider trading.

$30k is a relatively small fine for insider trading, considering how much the person(s) who bought her shares could have lost (I said could have lost because if said person(s) had held the shares until now, they would have turned a profit, which leads me to believe that in some cases, insiders can only help you so much...). But then again, I guess she was never convicted for insider trading... (I didn't follow the case that closely, so I'm not sure why no one pushed for it)

Having said that though (again, remember I do not condone insider trading, and I'm grateful for the laws in place in the U.S. capitalist system preventing it), I do get the impression that there are much bigger problems in Wallstreet than just insider trading.

 

You're absolutely right about Lay being guilty of far more than Stewart. Stewart is a punk thug where lay is the genuine crook article.

I can't quite understand how people can soften there persective on the woman because she has good decorating skills. (No way to imply you did that Jack... I just hear it.)

OJ was a good football player.

 

She didn't really hurt anyone.
I agree she broke the law.

What upsets me is that the Ken Lays, the Ebbers, of the world are still free. They are the ones who hurt the working people.

 

What do you mean? If she shed losses on someone else, they lost money. Sometimes when I lose money it hurts. If she had prior knowledge (she did) and didn't take her loss, someone else did.

Yes, it sucks that Lay, Ebbers and others are free and will eventually profit for crime. (See my post above where I say take there money)