Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce
If you're going to regulate Wall Street, you have to recruit people who know how it works, where it cheats, and where the bodies are buried.
I just want to know who's checking on the checkers?
|
this is a good point. Having worked on Wall Street should not be an automatic condemnation. If this is the standard, why would we bother with the fellow who wrote the letter as he quit?
We can't, more importantly, we shouldn't try to avoid contact with people who've worked on Wall Street ( or big oil or big pharma or defense, whatever) on that basis only. Where would we recruit our leaders from? Sports teams? Joe the Plumber? It is important to have actual expertise in such technical areas in order to have a chance to be competent in such areas.
Who's checking the checkers? Another good point. We are those checkers, ultimately. But there are other checks and balances in our systems of government, auditors, oversight offices, open government laws, etc. WA has a good reputation as an open government, as states go. Laws that reassert the sovereignity of the people to make decisions as to what's important to know and what's not are crucial tools for keeping our elected officials honest. They are just as human as we are after all.