[TheColorYellow]

I appreciate your sentiment, but I want to point out that your belief that "Traditional brokerage houses have regulations forcing them to play fair" and believing that there are adequate "reporting structures to enforce it" is a great example of the moral hazard that exists in the market today.

I agree that law and regulation plays an important role in the market, but as the market has advanced and become increasingly more complex than previous models, I do not believe Law and regulation has kept up.

The GME fiasco and the resulting litigation is a good example of these problems. And before anyone says this is proof the rules in place work - I'd like to point out that our online brokerage infrastructure and market structure has been around since the early 2000's. It's quite difficult to say what has not been surfaced and recognized. And no, despite the nature of the trade itself, no one should discredit the lawsuit as illegitimate. https://www.thinkadvisor.com/2021/01/29/gamestop-lawsuits-hi...

The absurdity and extreme nature of the GME case shows tells me that there are outstanding issues throughout this value chain. And the belief that our system of rules adequately handles this just because the rules exist is a strong indicator of the moral hazard that prevades our market culture.

[SkipperCat]

Everything is relative. You cite GME, fair point. I'll cite Quadriga CX, where the founder died in India and took the passwords to the grave with him. Pretty much everyone had their coins frozen forever. That would never happen to people's stock portfolio's at a major brokerage firm.

The SEC is far from perfect, but what they do adds value to the individual investor in general.