Oh, dear MAKE, my good friend! You still haven't forgotten that I turned upside with a stick the counters of the money changers? It wasn't with them that I had a problem with. Haven't I paid enough for doing that?
Why did I not accept and support the idea of an unregulated trading system, based on nominative or bearer shares, materialized, which would be sold or bought freely, like agricultural plots of land or vouchers for the "Cash for clunkers", in the classifieds?
But where do I start? First of all I want to publicly apologize to you, in case this position of mine at the time ever caused you problems or inconveniences. As you well know me, I would never be capable of that. I am very sorry if the dirty and heavy boot of abuse and incompetence trampled your fingers. They weren't sent by me.
And now, let's return to our friendly polemic. I've told you then, but let's resume our argument.
We are in 1995's Romania. Remember that not even banknotes were secured. How could we have secured the materialized stocks to prevent them from being falsified? And who could have made the difference between the good and the bad ones? Bank clerks? Notaries? Do you think they would have done it for free or they would have added to the trading costs? As you well remember, even in the electronic system there have been some frauds of this kind after the control keys of the initial system were eliminated. How big a chaos could have resulted from the falsification of the shares? Remember the chaos on the RASDAQ, caused by the fact that the USAID refused to give it the ability to query the depository prior to the confirmation of the sale offer. But of the case where someone's shareholder certificates were stolen or they'd lost them?
How many commissions would have been paid to the notaries for the selling and buying of shares? But most of all, how and where w
