Wednesday, October 14, 2009
"Our experiences from bringing possible securities fraud and money-laundering cases to the SEC have caused us to seriously question the SEC's commitment to protecting investors. We acknowledge that the agency is underfunded and understaffed and therefore must conduct a cost-benefit analysis for each case on its table", my emphasis, my emphasis, James Deitrick and Brian Vodicka (D&V), letter to the WSJ, 28 September 2009, link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204488304574435042334815558.html.
Nice going D&V. You guys must be SEC shills. I'm sure SEC staffers conduct the "cost benefit" analysis you have in mind, i.e., which costs can be exteralized and which benefits can the SEC staffer capture for himself. I disagree that the SEC is understaffed and underfunded. It knows which cases it takes and which it passes on. And why.