Marc Andreessen is being true to form when he attacks regulations, attacks Piketty and suggests that IPOs will flourish if we remove (what he describes as) "burdensome" regulations, "Regulation Fair Disclosure" etc.
However, he seems to be totally glossing over the fact that IPO regulations have already been weakened in recent years. This has resulted in less transparency and increased secrecy and that is exactly what people like Andreessen have been asking for.
It is questionable whether this increased secrecy actually benefits the economy or the average investor (of course, it is clear that the lack of transparency does benefit powerful interests in the country and that is why a bipartisan majority in our dysfunctional congress was able to miraculously come together and pass a bill to reduce regulations and cut down on IPO transparency).
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/13/the-twitter-i... touched on this topic in the context of Twitter's IPO.
However, he seems to be totally glossing over the fact that IPO regulations have already been weakened in recent years. This has resulted in less transparency and increased secrecy and that is exactly what people like Andreessen have been asking for.
It is questionable whether this increased secrecy actually benefits the economy or the average investor (of course, it is clear that the lack of transparency does benefit powerful interests in the country and that is why a bipartisan majority in our dysfunctional congress was able to miraculously come together and pass a bill to reduce regulations and cut down on IPO transparency). http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/13/the-twitter-i... touched on this topic in the context of Twitter's IPO.