SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for SoyCow5389
The sale of nearly $2 million in corporate stock by high-level Equifax executives shortly after the company learned of a major data breach has sparked public outrage that could turn into another hurdle for the credit rating agency.
The sales all occurred before the company publicly reported the breach, a disclosure that quickly sent its stock tumbling. The timing of the sales could attract federal scrutiny, legal experts say, though proving insider trading would be difficult. A company spokeswoman said the executives did not know about the breach when they sold their shares.
“It certainly would be exactly the type of trading pattern before a high-profile event that the [Securities and Exchange Commission] would investigate,” said Brandon L. Garrett, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law. “Even if they do not bring charges it is the type of conduct that a company should not tolerate in its executives. It sends a terrible message to the public and to customers.”
The SEC declined to comment on whether it was investigating the matter.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 11 2017, @08:11PM (21 children)
If they knew, and they traded that stock, they're genuine idiots. If Martha Stewart can do time for something that she didn't even control (no, seriously, mens rea is not required for some SEC violations- nor for bigamy, so double-check that divorce paperwork!) then deliberate, flagrant insider traders are likely to get it good and hard.
If they didn't know, but were deemed to have known, or have been in a position to know, or deemed to have been supposed to know, then they should be falling over themselves to pay all that money back to Uncle Sam and shareholders along with a zillion apologies, lest they get it good and hard.
Either way, the only real news story will be if the SEC decides not to investigate.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Monday September 11 2017, @08:53PM (20 children)
the only real news story will be if the SEC decides not to investigate.
On the contrary! The big news will be if the SEC does go after them. Let's not forget who is in charge now.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 11 2017, @09:00PM (19 children)
Oh, right. How could we all forget? Trumpasaurus CheetoFire in a Drumpfster ... something something orange dude we all hate as per the latest communique ...
Look, bro, I know it's all cool and stuff to hate on Trump and everyone who voted for him (because as we all know they are racist, sexist, bigoted nazibomination KKK members who are all secretly gay and having abortions for their preteen lovers) but let's not forget that a majority of people in the civilian public service actually go Left. Let's save the hatred for people who can't actually do anything important, right?
Glad we had this little chat. Pick up your fresh protest banner outside, the bus leaves in twenty.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 11 2017, @09:06PM (6 children)
Pretty lame troll you posted there, buddy. Nobody really expects better from the democrats these days either, any person that does is a damn fool. Trump and the Clintons are still very close friends.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 11 2017, @09:11PM (5 children)
On a point of order, if you please, it should be remembered that Martha Stewart went to jail on a much less egregious offence during the Obama administration. If the same is to be expected from both sides of the aisle, then the honourable member's suggestion can only be interpreted to imply that the SEC will investigate and prosecute in earnest.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Monday September 11 2017, @09:48PM (2 children)
Martha Stewart is a nobody. Equifax is a vital part of banking's usury practice and political campaign funding. They would/will get equal treatment from democrats and republicans alike. It's strictly business. There is no reason to look at it any other way.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 11 2017, @10:36PM
Equifax might be important (although that rug can be pulled away real quick - as it was for Enron), but the big fish on top? They're all swimming in the pond, and are entirely dispensible the moment that they look like rocking any important boats.
Besides, Equifax is not institutionally being accused of cheating the market - just massive data incompetence.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 12 2017, @04:12AM
I respectively disagree. We should look at the whole system of buying Government as treason and throw everyone involved in jail.
I'll be over in the corner holding my breath and petting a unicorn while I wait for that to happen. Either that or having more scotch.
(Score: 4, Informative) by khallow on Monday September 11 2017, @11:45PM (1 child)
It was actually during Bush's first term in 2004.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 11 2017, @11:51PM
Jesus, that long ago? Wow, I'm old...
Anyway, that actually makes the argument stronger that people might face consequences under Trump than they might have under Obama or Clinton. After all, the Bushes were frequently described as the pets of Wall Street.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 11 2017, @09:38PM (11 children)
You sound exactly like creimer from slashdot.
Anyhow trump is contained but he fucking sucks and shaming his voters is fair game. Maybe they'll give up their conspiracy theories once their memories are filled with painful memories of being teased by smart people who turned out to be right.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 11 2017, @10:13PM (10 children)
I think you'll find that this plan of yours backfires.
What are you going to call them? KKK? Including the black people? Ok, bad plan. ... ummm, redneck inbred assholes? Probably won't bother the truck-driving folks with bumperstickers reading things like PROUD AMERICAN REDNECK.
OK, think, think, think. How best to shame people who consider their position a badge of pride? "You shoulda voted for Hillary!" "Uh, no. Dipshit." OK, that plan didn't work. What else? "You vote against your economic interests!" "But for my political interests. Go pound sand." Whups, bad plan. OK, what else? "You're a nazi!" "Right, so why's it the left that comes up with the steaming anti-jewish rhetoric these days?" Ouch! Oh shit, running out of ideas here...
Honestly, I don't know what your political leaning is. I'm basically neutral (I think both major parties suck) but looking at the two sides, if you think that shaming works on people who don't even have the same value system as you, you really aren't paying attention.
But you go on trying. I'm sure they'll have plenty of laughs.
On a different note, you'd better come up with a really convincing, incontrovertible reason why Hillary would have been better. Because so far, I'm not seeing it. There's every reason to believe that she would have been firmly in the lovely silk-lined pockets of Goldman Sachs and their best buddies, sucking their dick through a strategically placed hole. And if I don't see it, you can bet your bottom dollar Stan the Steelworker won't see it either.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 12 2017, @12:39AM (7 children)
How many black people voted for Trump in the election? Serious question.
"You shouldn't have voted for Trump" != "You should have voted for Hillary". Logic fail.
Exactly what "political interests" are you talking about? I'm at a loss to understand you here.
????? What anti-Jewish rhetoric from the left are you talking about? Please be specific.
I really can't say for certain but, somehow, I have my doubts about your neutrality. Just sayin'.
Again, opposition to Trump != being for Hillary. When are you alt-right types going to get that through your thick skulls?!?
Well, at least on this point, we agree. But the rest of your screed is complete crap.
(Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Tuesday September 12 2017, @04:58AM
LMGTFY: http://www.cnn.com/election/results/exit-polls [cnn.com]
The Orange Menace got 8% of the black vote.
(Score: 1) by Atatsu on Tuesday September 12 2017, @03:15PM
You just don't get it. It's the same with being pro-choice. If you're pro-choice you're OBVIOUSLY for abortion!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 12 2017, @03:44PM (4 children)
About 8% of black voters leaned Trump, according to http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/behind-trumps-victory-divisions-by-race-gender-education/ [pewresearch.org] ... there you are! Serious question, serious answer at no extra charge!
OK, sure, how would you have preferred to shame them on their Trump vote?
"Shoulda stayed home." "Hahahahha!"
"Shoulda written in Bernie." "Are you kidding me?"
"Shoulda voted Stein." "Check your meds, dude."
But please, do go on and explain how you'd shame them for something where they think you're wrong and they're right. Please. Incorporate all available details into your response, because this will be a party of magical thinking and denial...
Precisely. You don't understand. You don't get it. You don't see their point of view, and don't want to. Which is why your little project of shaming those who feel no shame over the topics that you think should matter to them, is doomed to shipwreck.
What do the cool kids say these days? Oh, right, let me google that for you: http://www.google.com/search?q=left-wing+antisemitism+USA [google.com]
Sure. Whatever. Don't care. For the record: I care about good public policy, not labels. I care about functional societies (duh! because I want to live in one!) and flag-waving partisanship from all sides is a problem for that.
Oh, and I'm not even american, so there's that...
I don't know. Show me an alt-right guy and I guess I'll ask him. But it's a matter of electoral mathematics that in the USA there were two plausible alternatives, and the one that wasn't Trump was Hillary. Don't like it? Change the constitution and the electoral college in particular. Anything else in the current system was an abstention, a spoiled ballot or a protest vote. Don't want to cope with that? Well ... I guess denial is cool, and if you want to live there I propose that you never look up the mathematics of party support in the USA's electoral system.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 12 2017, @05:19PM (3 children)
"Leaned" Trump? What exactly does that mean? Did they, or did they not, vote for Trump? But the larger point which seems to have escaped you is that 8% is barely above a statistical fluke. (Most polls have a margin of error around 3%.)
Look, you blithering assclown, the point which is as plain as the one atop your head is that there were more than two candidates on the ballot! Whether people are ashamed of their Trump vote (or not) is neither here nor there.
I note that you didn't answer my question. Is there a reason why you didn't answer? Do you even have an answer? Or was your blather about "political interests" merely empty rhetoric?
Let me just quote a couple of headings from the wikipedia article that topped the list from your little google search which, by the way, reads a bit like an alt-right apologist's defense of Isreal (suddenly I feel oily and greasy all over - Blech!). "Criticism of Israel is not always antisemitism". And, much of what your apparent "heroes" label antisemitism appears to be "a political ploy to stifle criticism of Israel". While I am a supporter of Israel, that doesn't mean that I give unflinching approval of everything they do. Sometimes they do need to be called out on their egregious behavior. And, no, that does not mean everything they do is egregious.
I didn't say anything about not liking it. I asked you to explain yourself. And what I got back was mostly bluster and empty posturing. To say that I am disappointed doesn't begin to plumb the depths.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 12 2017, @07:28PM (2 children)
Sure. Fine. Even assuming that only one in twenty black voters went for Trump (the low end of the margin of error there) that's still enough people to fill a city like Seattle. Depending on how the margin of error goes (including black voters who wouldn't admit to pollsters that they'd consider Trump), we could be talking about millions of people. Not just a knitting circle or a book club, kind of numbers.
From earlier in this thread: Anyhow trump is contained but he fucking sucks and shaming his voters is fair game. Maybe they'll give up their conspiracy theories once their memories are filled with painful memories of being teased by smart people who turned out to be right.
The source of the topic of shaming is left as an exercise for the reader.
OK, since you insist and you can't work it out for yourself: people who voted for Trump weren't necessarily counting dollars and cents in political promises, but were looking for policies. Some were anti-globalisation, or at least anti-NAFTA. Some were anti-warmist. Some were anti-abortion. Some were pro-gun. Some were anti-Hillary for a variety of reasons. Some were pro-military (or even in favour of greater military interventionism, or unleashing the military in the pursuit of political objectives). There are lots of reasons why people might have voted for Trump, or republicans in general, that have nothing to do with their immediate perceived economic interests, and plenty to do with their immediate perceived policy interests.
There you go. Some actual examples and facts for you to dismiss as blustering and posturing. Some even with numbers! Pleasurably awaiting your next dignified and thoughtful dismissal ...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 12 2017, @08:41PM (1 child)
Sorry to tell you this, but it's roughly an order of magnitude smaller. That army of black supporters standing behind you to back you up is quite a bit smaller than you suppose.
Yeah, it sucks when reality comes crashing down upon you. An adult admits when they are wrong and seeks to correct their mistake. A juvenile will posture and bluster, insisting that s/he meant to do that in a desperate attempt to save what little face they have left. A small child will just throw a temper tantrum, rolling and writhing on the ground as they stamp their feet. So far, Trump voters are not showing us a very flattering picture of themselves. The scary thing is they (still) get to vote.
Trump supporters are anti-globalisation just for the sake of being anti-globalization? I always thought that was about saving American jobs.
And "anti-warmist" just for the sake of being anti-warmist? Again, I thought that was about saving their jobs.
OK, I will actually give you the anti-abortion argument, although I wouldn't be surprised if Gorsuch ends up being another Souter-like disappointment. I wonder: if Gorsuch does end up being another Souter, do you suppose that any Trump supporters will then admit they were wrong? Hmmmm.
About the pro-gun thing, if Sandy Hook couldn't do it then I doubt that any gun regulation legislation is ever going to be passed within my lifetime.
Such as...?
Yeah, I'm getting tired of people waving their "pro-military" bona fides around as some sort of penis substitute. And, might I point out that Hillary was no shrinking dove, either as a candidate or when she actually served in government?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 12 2017, @09:26PM
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/12/black-voter-turnout-fell-in-2016-even-as-a-record-number-of-americans-cast-ballots/ [pewresearch.org]
The number in question is recorded to 16.4 Million.
If we take the earlier referenced 8% as out starting point, and assume swings possible of 3% in either direction, that gives us 5% and 11% as values to consider. 5% of 16.4 million is 820,000 (which is the ballpark of the population of a medium-large city such as Seattle). However, 11% of 16.4 million is over 1.8. While I'll grant you that it isn't a gargantuan number, and rounds up to two million, it sure as hell isn't an order of magnitude off. Not even a binary order of magnitude. At best the most conservative estimate could be suggested to be an order of magnitude off , especially if it's binary that you mean, but the other side of the estimate is readily cast as, to put it in financier's terms: seven figures.
But ok, sure. I'm sure all the OTHER Trump supporters were KKK members, right? And all those nasty Uncle Toms who voted for him were just beaten by white supremacists until they got Stockholm Syndrome. You can't blame them. It's the evil trumpeters!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 12 2017, @02:40AM (1 child)
Ah yes, one of those "I'm basically neutral" types that only ever manages to make excuses for/defend alt-right KEKolds and Trumpster fires, but always qualifies their one-sided neutrality with "Look, I hate both sides, but..." Got it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 12 2017, @03:57PM
Oh, OK, sure, I guess I'll give equal time for a bit. Seems kinda pointless though, since people were shaking their little fists of rage at the Trump direction, rather than the other way around, but .... *deep breath* ...
Climate change shows every sign of being real, and in the direction of greater warmth trapped in the biosphere.
Abortion should probably be what Bill Clinton said: safe, legal and rare.
The Bill of Rights is not just part of the constitution, but a damn fine idea.
The environment is precious and we should look after it, in our own interests if nothing else.
Militarised police are a very bad idea, and policing in the USA should be thoroughly revamped.
That should get you started...