Martha Stewart - Hypocrite
On her website www.marthatalks.com, Stewart asks the "American people" not to think about her but the 1,200 inmates she is incarcerated with. She believes that these people deserve second chances, better treatment - rehabilitation and education instead of incarceration. Her seeming selflessness and concern for the Jane Doe and Joe Schmoe are reflected in the shows and magazines that are dedicated to enhancing the lifestyle of the average American person. This egalitarian mannerism is one of the reasons she is loved by her fans. She is a good person.
Before we are seduced by the atmosphere of kindness and selflessness, however, let us examine the issue of insider trading. To be fair, she was not charged with insider trading, but insider trading is still very pertinent and very fundamental to any discussion involving her crimes. Her own lawyers argue that jurors wrongly believed she was being charged with insider trading (source: CNN).
The difference between insider trading and free-market gains is that insider trading involves stocks, exclusively. A stock is a share of the company - if Abby Tomato owns 100 shares of Ketchup, Inc., she in effect is an owner of that company. The obligation of a company is towards its owners - a corporation has the obligation to increase the value of its stocks for the owners of those stocks. People who buy stocks believe that the company will do its best for them. Major shareholders of any corporation have a spot on the board.
Insider trading then, is the illegal benefit by one owner over another even though both have the right to benefit in equal proportions.
Insider trading affects the average American who owns the stock. If Martha Stewart were not involved in this issue, she would probably say something to the extent of "Insider trading suppresses the American dream." That much is true - that no matter what the economic arguments are, no matter how much it costs the SEC to investigate insider trading - fundamentally it is hyprocritical to the values of a corporate America. When Tomato King, who owns 100,000 shares of Ketchup, Inc. sells his stocks at $100, and the value of the stock drops to $90 - it is Abby Tomato who suffers. Had the information be released publically, the price might have only dropped down to $92 - and Abby Tomato would have $2 more. $2 isn't very much of course - but that one insider trading act deprives tens of thousands of Abbys of their $2.
Therefore when Martha Stewart engaged in insider trading, she was in effect gaining profit - no matter how little - by cheating many people of a little of their money. If I hacked into a bank and took a penny from every account it wouldn't be morally correct either, even if it does not severely damage the savings of a couple million people. Why then, does she act like she cares about the average Abby Tomato?
The answer is simply - it is an act. Stewart went to a prison nicknamed "Camp Cupcake" - she cleans a little bit, but the rest of the time can be spent playing tennis, walking, having yoga lessons, etc. Her only complaint has been the food. I won't grumble about the fact that I am in part paying for the luxurious prison. Last week, then, Stewart asked the judge to shorten her sentence of home confinement from 5 months to 1 month, saying that it was damaging to her business. I won't grumble about the fact that she's allowed to leave 40 hours a week.
I will however, take note that it is interesting that she feels it is damaging to her business, which is also a corporation.
Before we are seduced by the atmosphere of kindness and selflessness, however, let us examine the issue of insider trading. To be fair, she was not charged with insider trading, but insider trading is still very pertinent and very fundamental to any discussion involving her crimes. Her own lawyers argue that jurors wrongly believed she was being charged with insider trading (source: CNN).
The difference between insider trading and free-market gains is that insider trading involves stocks, exclusively. A stock is a share of the company - if Abby Tomato owns 100 shares of Ketchup, Inc., she in effect is an owner of that company. The obligation of a company is towards its owners - a corporation has the obligation to increase the value of its stocks for the owners of those stocks. People who buy stocks believe that the company will do its best for them. Major shareholders of any corporation have a spot on the board.
Insider trading then, is the illegal benefit by one owner over another even though both have the right to benefit in equal proportions.
Insider trading affects the average American who owns the stock. If Martha Stewart were not involved in this issue, she would probably say something to the extent of "Insider trading suppresses the American dream." That much is true - that no matter what the economic arguments are, no matter how much it costs the SEC to investigate insider trading - fundamentally it is hyprocritical to the values of a corporate America. When Tomato King, who owns 100,000 shares of Ketchup, Inc. sells his stocks at $100, and the value of the stock drops to $90 - it is Abby Tomato who suffers. Had the information be released publically, the price might have only dropped down to $92 - and Abby Tomato would have $2 more. $2 isn't very much of course - but that one insider trading act deprives tens of thousands of Abbys of their $2.
Therefore when Martha Stewart engaged in insider trading, she was in effect gaining profit - no matter how little - by cheating many people of a little of their money. If I hacked into a bank and took a penny from every account it wouldn't be morally correct either, even if it does not severely damage the savings of a couple million people. Why then, does she act like she cares about the average Abby Tomato?
The answer is simply - it is an act. Stewart went to a prison nicknamed "Camp Cupcake" - she cleans a little bit, but the rest of the time can be spent playing tennis, walking, having yoga lessons, etc. Her only complaint has been the food. I won't grumble about the fact that I am in part paying for the luxurious prison. Last week, then, Stewart asked the judge to shorten her sentence of home confinement from 5 months to 1 month, saying that it was damaging to her business. I won't grumble about the fact that she's allowed to leave 40 hours a week.
I will however, take note that it is interesting that she feels it is damaging to her business, which is also a corporation.
posted by Michael at 5:52 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home