[...] The SEC tends to be focused on stuff that’s a lot more technical. They’re very focused on technical violations of insider trading laws. And, you know, what are the consequences of insider trading? I don’t know. If people believe the market is rigged, then people aren’t going to trade in the market, okay, but the kinds of violations that they go after are not going to cause the same magnitude of damage as selling really risky derivatives to a company to the point where you could blow up that company. I mean, that’s just much more disruptive. But it’s not as clear a violation of the rules as, “Okay, Joe Schmo had material nonpublic information about company X, because he was on the restructuring committee, and then he decided to sell his bonds. Even though maybe that information didn’t have a meaningful effect on the price, technically it’s material nonpublic information, and we are going to punish that guy.” It seems to me they’re focused on the wrong things. Not because they’re bad people or because they’re not intelligent people, but because if you’re a lawyer, that’s how you think.