The question I have for Senator Levin, from his line of questioning is let's say I own 1,000 shares of MSFT stock. My opinion changes that I now think MSFT will be a crappy company and will lose money. So I sell my shares to my buddy Bob. However, I feel so strongly that MSFT is crap, that I will also then short the stock by another 1,000 shares. Should I be required to tell Bob of my plans? That I believe I am selling him a load of crap stock? And what if MSFT *does* then go bankrupt and Bob is left holding just paper and I become rich? Should I be investigated?

It's the same thing as what GS did. They didn't make the housing market tank, they just understood it better than most and thought that their risk was too high and decided to not only sell it off (who wants to hold the equivalent of stocks that are going to go down?) but they also shorted it. I don't see a problem there. I wish someone could tell me what Goldman did wrong. They simply worked the market exactly like it is supposed to be played. It's a zero sum game. They were right, other people were wrong. If GS actually *caused* the housing market to tank, then sure, that's criminal and that's securities fraud. But I've seen no evidence that they did that.

As with Patrick, I believe we are thinking about regulating human nature. Sort of a "political correctness" of philosophy.

Although I believe the "Tulip Mania" is the first recorded "bubble", I am sure there were nmany efore. And that there have been very many since. It is simply the "business cycle" writ large.

Ever wonder why Germany was able to re-arm and build a huge army while we were in the throws of the "Great Depression"? Some say it was our regulation. Now, I am sure that some will argue that all of that military spending was "stimulus".