Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 2201

Should Small Businesses be Allowed to Sell Non-Public Stock Under Certain Circumstances?

Argument in favor

This bill would make it easier for entrepreneurs to launch startups, create jobs, and grow the economy. The exemption is tailored narrowly enough to protect investors.

Sean's Opinion
···
11/06/2017
Any person who makes an investment without these safeguards is risking their own money. These businesses should be forced to disclose this information before being allowed to do so.
Like (36)
Follow
Share
wadepreston's Opinion
···
11/09/2017
Innovation and effort are America’s best natural resources. They need access to capital in order to flourish and make our society better. There is no reason for the government to be involved in economic transactions between two willing private parties.
Like (27)
Follow
Share
Yehowshua's Opinion
···
11/09/2017
With a $500,000 limit, I don't see why anyone would vote no. Clearly, small business and startups are the target. Apple , Microsoft and the likes are completely excluded... Unless they make a nasty loophole out of this.
Like (12)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

This bill would expose investors to unnecessary risk by granting companies an exemption to sell securities without the normal safeguards.

Ticktock's Opinion
···
11/08/2017
One of the contributing factors in the 1929 stock market crash was unsecured investments. Guess where that got us. I love these Republicans. Trying the same old stunts and expecting a different outcome.
Like (149)
Follow
Share
Michael777's Opinion
···
11/09/2017
Yet another scam bill created by the Republican Overlords benefit only big business interests over ordinary people by allowing companies to sell unregistered securities without important guardrails!
Like (42)
Follow
Share
Andrea's Opinion
···
11/09/2017
This smacks of favoritism. Certain opportunities go to the super-rich or the "inside club." Let's make business transparent again.
Like (31)
Follow
Share
    Any person who makes an investment without these safeguards is risking their own money. These businesses should be forced to disclose this information before being allowed to do so.
    Like (36)
    Follow
    Share
    One of the contributing factors in the 1929 stock market crash was unsecured investments. Guess where that got us. I love these Republicans. Trying the same old stunts and expecting a different outcome.
    Like (149)
    Follow
    Share
    Yet another scam bill created by the Republican Overlords benefit only big business interests over ordinary people by allowing companies to sell unregistered securities without important guardrails!
    Like (42)
    Follow
    Share
    This smacks of favoritism. Certain opportunities go to the super-rich or the "inside club." Let's make business transparent again.
    Like (31)
    Follow
    Share
    Innovation and effort are America’s best natural resources. They need access to capital in order to flourish and make our society better. There is no reason for the government to be involved in economic transactions between two willing private parties.
    Like (27)
    Follow
    Share
    With a $500,000 limit, I don't see why anyone would vote no. Clearly, small business and startups are the target. Apple , Microsoft and the likes are completely excluded... Unless they make a nasty loophole out of this.
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    Sounds like some more unethical practices that has the potential to put many at risk, but increase the rewards for the very lucky few who have stacked the cards in their favor.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    Great way to legally embezzle.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    This helps angel investment. Great!
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    Unsecured investments helped to crash the economy before and this is just another way to screw the regular people.HELP THE RICH AND SCREW US!!!
    Like (8)
    Follow
    Share
    There is a reason why securities are regulated. Time and time again the unscrupulous have taken advantage of the unsophisticated. Why should we endorse the potential for abuse?
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    If the definition of “substantial existing relationship” with the small business owner means family members or close acquaintances then these investors must understand the risks they are taking. If the investment provides necessary liquidity for the small business and there is a buy back clause added so that the investor has a means to sell the stock later then why not allow the issuance of non-public stock for small businesses. Large corporations already offer restricted stock which is similar.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    I can’t imagine why any small business would want to sell stock to outside investors, but to the extent such a bill would increase liquidity and access to capital, that’s a good thing.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    This helps rich people start small businesses. So they can launder each other’s dirty money. Update. Elephants passed it.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    With no regulation this bill is ripe for money laundering and fraud. As a small business owner I’d love the chance raise that kind of money but it’s ripe for fraud and money laundering.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill is dressed up as a benefit for entrepreneurs but it's really another loop hole for those familiar with gaming the system to use. Vote no.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Free market needs to be free
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Money Out Of Nothing, Chant With Me. ENRON ENRON ENRON ENRON!
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    capitalism is great and all but we need to let it flourish as much as possible given the amount of advantages conglomerates and monopolies enjoy
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    More shortcuts for the greedy. Nay. I graduated in 2009 while the 2008 crisis effects were still real. I’d rather not go back to that.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE