On the recordNovember 20, 2013
The answer is zero. And the reason the answer is zero, sir, is because it would take money away from people who did not get their own money.
Source
congress.govThe answer is zero. And the reason the answer is zero, sir, is because it would take money away from people who did not get their own money.
Garrett explains the implications of Ponzi schemes on SIPC payments.
Share
More from Scott Garrett
But why would we want to extend the taxpayer subsidy and bailout safety net to capital markets and asset management?
Ex-Im has transformed the role of Government from a disinterested referee that guarantees a free and open marketplace into a biased actor that tilts the scales in favor of its friends and businesses.
Accurate and transparent financial statements are absolutely critical to maintaining investor confidence in our markets.