News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Not-so-crazy alternative to more finanacial regulation by krschultz on Thursday March 26, 2009 @11:11PM (#534604)
Imagine the case of someone with all their money in index funds, I would now be liable for EVERY SINGLE PUBLIC COMPANY. People would flee the stock market so fast it WOULD go to near 0.
Re:Not-so-crazy alternative to more finanacial regulation by payne92 on Friday March 27, 2009 @07:22AM (#534932)
No, the key is to threshold it so it only applies in the extreme cases.

For example, let's say, bankruptcy only lets you discharge 100% of the first $1 trillion. After that, some combination of owners/officers/executives are responsible for (say) 0.1% of obligation beyond $1 trillion.

With these thresholds, it hardly applies to "every single public company".

Re:Not-so-crazy alternative to more finanacial regulation by ryanwaggoner on Friday March 27, 2009 @09:04AM (#535002)
This makes absolutely no sense. Have any of these companies racked up losses beyond $1 trillion? And even if they have, who is going to pay for the other 99.9% of their losses? This makes no difference to anything, except that you're now making some investments too risky for anyone to touch. The key, however, is not that the super-risky investments are the ones where companies look risky. They're just ANY company in certain industries.