In response to:

Legalize Insider Trading

Paulus Textor Wrote: Nov 28, 2012 9:38 AM
Insider trading laws are great examples of vague thinking based on cartoon-like characterizations of the rich. Suppose, for example, you are riding an elevator and overhear two executives talking to each other about their business plans. You buy or sell stock based on that tidbit of information. Is that insider trading? Maybe yes, maybe no. There's no way to know, in advance, if you are breaking the law. If you have no way of knowing, in advance, the way in which a judge and jury will "interpret" a law, then you have a bad law.
Insider trading leads the news again, casting a cloud over Steven Cohen's SAC Capital Advisors $14 billion hedge fund.

The SEC charged Mathew Martoma, who used to manage a SAC Capital division, with using inside information about tests on an Alzheimer's drug to trade stock of the company working on it.

The media love this stuff. I imagine reporters sitting around saying: "The SEC finally will punish greedy Wall Street! These tycoons rig the game -- cheating is how they acquire $14 billion -- and now noble government prosecutors will bring justice."

But this is nonsense. Government prosecutors are as ruthless...