Courtesy of Joshua Brown
This week I appeared on Stand Up! with Pete Dominick on Sirius XM radio to flesh out my points about the Fiduciary Debate from my new article at Fortune. People in the non-financial media are starting to care about the issue.
It’s good that more people are becoming aware and interested in the issue. It directly affects millions of households.
Even Gawker (yes, that Gawker) is getting involved. Hamilton Nolan lights up Paul Ryan, the biggest detractor of the new bill making its way around Washington.
Read it here:
Paul Ryan’s Brain-Twisting Rationales For Why You Should Be Ripped Off (Gawker)
***
Excerpt:
Naturally, Republicans, as the primary paid representatives of the financial industry, oppose this rule. Investment News points out that the Number One opponent of this rule change is the main man, Paul Ryan himself, who has been ratcheting up his public statements against the rule. One thing about Very Simple Rules That Are Clearly Good For the Public is that the tortured reasons offered by people who oppose them are often hilarious! How many ways can you say “I want to protect the right of financial advisors to rip people off?” Here is one way, from Paul Ryan’s website: “Don’t be fooled. In reality, this rule would create more paperwork and record-keeping requirements for planners, meaning higher costs for consumers.” Haha. “We are determined to do everything possible to protect consumers and stop this rule.” HAHA. Literally the opposite of what is true. It is remarkable.
Ryan has also called this rule “an example of massive overkill by the federal government,” presumably in the same way that a rule against theft is massive overkill by the federal government against pickpockets.
