Unusual Stock Trading by Whales in US Congress • Hacker News Board

Re: Unusual Stock Trading by Whales in US Congress

#261

Post by mikepurvis » Thu, Apr 15, 2021, 7:23 PM UTC

somethoughts wrote: post #179

psychlops wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just require them to announce their trades publicly 24 hours in advance. And let them manage their own finances. All these shenanigan's would disappear.

Yes - in addition - just have documentation sites like unusual whales which track the trades, holdings and profits of politicians - create infographics prior to every election and distribute them to existing voter information/polling prediction sites like real clear politics. Politicians already long on certain stocks can also profit from legislation that they are passing. Being privy to insider info which leads to c…

I would love to believe that would make a difference, but in a hyperpartisan world where many vote based on a handful of ideological allegiances, how many would seriously be moved to change sides over something as small as a little corruption? Or is this something that would be more at the primary level, where it really is more about personality and personal qualities than party?

In any case, the Trump movement's whole response to this kind of thing was a combination of denial and "lol everyone does it", and it seems like that was enough for many in that camp.

Re: Unusual Stock Trading by Whales in US Congress

#262

Post by tomcam » Thu, Apr 15, 2021, 7:23 PM UTC

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #245

jonhohle wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems like the definition of material, non-public information. In the past I don’t think Congress was bound to the same trading rules as the general public (blech), but last I checked, Mr. Pelosi is not in Congress.

Congress is bound by the same rules as the general public, they just aren't legally insiders. Insider trading requires not only material, non-public but also some kind of duty of confidentiality to the company you are trading. Congress doesn't have that type of relationship, so they are not insiders. Their spouses aren't either. There are some additional rules that apply to people who gain knowledge in an official ca…

Well they aren't legally insiders because... they made the rules.

Re: Unusual Stock Trading by Whales in US Congress

#263

Post by tomcam » Thu, Apr 15, 2021, 7:24 PM UTC

femiagbabiaka wrote: post #247

sakopov wrote: post #15

> For example, Pelosi in Dec 22 was against more stimulus. Her husband buys deep ITM TSLA and AAPL calls that day. December 23rd, she is suddenly for stimulus again, with those same companies ralling 5%, giving her an instant +30 return. > Congressman Gottheimer is absolutely an incredible options trader. He’s been selling calls at peaks on $MSFT all 2021, & seemingly buying back the contracts on dips. This in blocks…

Oligarchy in the U.S. is giving my mother country (Nigeria) a run for its money.

Don't be silly. The U.S. is infinitely more corrupt than Nigeria. Forgive me, but there's just no comparison.

Re: Unusual Stock Trading by Whales in US Congress

#264

Post by ABeeSea » Thu, Apr 15, 2021, 7:25 PM UTC

SilasX wrote: post #219

ABeeSea wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A large swing increases the IV which increases the premium (since the stock is now more likely to swing back down). Also decreases the risk in case the trade moves against you.

But then you'd own the option so you'd benefit from the volatility and can quickly cash out, right?

Yes, you cash out the options when the IV spikes when swings up.

Re: Unusual Stock Trading by Whales in US Congress

#265

Post by eloff » Thu, Apr 15, 2021, 7:26 PM UTC

blunte wrote: post #256

eloff wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How much money is enough for these people? :( What kind of attitude is that? If you have savings, one seeks a return on said savings by investing them. That's perfectly normal and rational behavior at all wealth levels.

Let me phrase the question differently: How much money is enough if you already have $100M and to gain more, you have to manipulate and cheat? But even without changing the question, $100M invested in a very low risk manner will generate considerable cash flow (if you regularly take some profits). So without even spending your "savings", you can live very comfortably. However, a special thing happens when you are hig…

> How much money is enough if you already have $100M and to gain more, you have to manipulate and cheat?

Yeah, that's not a good at any wealth level.

> But even without changing the question, $100M invested in a very low risk manner will generate considerable cash flow (if you regularly take some profits)

Sure. But individual risk appetites vary and at that wealth level you can afford to diversify like crazy - and should in my opinion. I'm not sure what that had to do with anything.

Re: Unusual Stock Trading by Whales in US Congress

#266

Post by somethoughts » Thu, Apr 15, 2021, 7:26 PM UTC

klyrs wrote: post #217

throwawaygh wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not just prohibit members of Congress of owning stock? They are some of the most powerful people in the world. Why is it so much to ask that a Senator or especially Representative serving in the most powerful legislative body in the world just take a cash position for 2-6 years?

I fully agree, and I'd like to extend it to their families as well. But... you ask "why not" and the simple reason is that only they could enact such a law. And even when the laws are in place -- Trump ran roughshod over the foreign emoluments clause, and there were zero consequences. Why would the richest and most powerful Democrats set such a precedent, only to have it turned around when they're in power and stand…

Yes - it definitely seems like it should be more or a "let's hope we can see both" type thing rather than an "either or type" thing. I think publicizing existing holdings is huge in that it can be done based on existing data sets as unusualwhale has shown and it is something that "we the people" can do, today - perhaps just by sharing this article.

Eradicating politicians doing insider trading is a much longer slog that we are mostly just hoping "those with the power" will enact against their own self interests.

Re: Unusual Stock Trading by Whales in US Congress

#267

Post by smt88 » Thu, Apr 15, 2021, 7:27 PM UTC

Jommi wrote: post #167

smt88 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's easy to rephrase this as follows: People should not be able to make bets on matters over which they secretly control the outcome. That means any federal official should have their investments behind a blind trust of some sort, no exceptions.

Edit it to "secret bets" or even "non publicly announced".

I'd have to think it through more, but my gut says that I don't care if the bet is secret. Although I would separately support a law that all elected officials must have extreme transparency into their finances.

I think people should give up all of their right to privacy (when it comes to business, finances, travel, and even conversations) when they acquire a large amount of power. In my head, a US senator would have that much power and that little privacy, whereas a US representative in the House would not.

Re: Unusual Stock Trading by Whales in US Congress

#268

Post by BurningFrog » Thu, Apr 15, 2021, 7:27 PM UTC

cameronh90 wrote: post #259

lend000 wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should they be held under less scrutiny than CEO's? They typically have to clear their stock sales with the SEC months in advance.

Also as a regular fintech worker, I have to get internal approval from my employer for anything I do. Why can government representatives trade willy nilly without any oversight?

If you wrote the rules for yourself, they would probably be more lenient :)

Re: Unusual Stock Trading by Whales in US Congress

#269

Post by eloff » Thu, Apr 15, 2021, 7:29 PM UTC

gowld wrote: post #235

eloff wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How much money is enough for these people? :( What kind of attitude is that? If you have savings, one seeks a return on said savings by investing them. That's perfectly normal and rational behavior at all wealth levels.

"normal and rational" is different from "ethical or moral". "All wealth levels" are not the same.

Let me strengthen my position by adding that it is also moral and ethical to seek a return by investing, providing you make reasonably ethical investments. Maybe not in the coal industry or whale meat industry - but any number of things can be perfectly ethical and even beneficial to society at large.

Re: Unusual Stock Trading by Whales in US Congress

#270

Post by jonhohle » Thu, Apr 15, 2021, 7:29 PM UTC

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #245

jonhohle wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems like the definition of material, non-public information. In the past I don’t think Congress was bound to the same trading rules as the general public (blech), but last I checked, Mr. Pelosi is not in Congress.

Congress is bound by the same rules as the general public, they just aren't legally insiders. Insider trading requires not only material, non-public but also some kind of duty of confidentiality to the company you are trading. Congress doesn't have that type of relationship, so they are not insiders. Their spouses aren't either. There are some additional rules that apply to people who gain knowledge in an official ca…

This falls under misappropriation which does not require the reader to any relationship to the company being traded, only material, non-public information.