Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks • Hacker News Board

Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks

#71

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 9:36 PM UTC

N0tAThr0wAway wrote: post #21

Someone once told me that a stipulation for public service should involve converting all your holdings into index funds only. Thought that was an interesting proposal.

> Someone once told me that a stipulation for public service should involve converting all your holdings into index funds only.

For most elected officials (that have broad scope of potential jurisdiction and thus are almost impossible to avoid conflicts of interests), blind trusts are probably even better.

For most public servants, even those that have decision-making authority that could potentially raise conflict interests, disclosure and recusal rules are probably all that is needed (and, actually, lots of public servants have no decision–making authority that is likely to even require that.)

Appellate and Supreme Court judges could arguably fit in either category; trial court judges seem squarely in the second.

Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks

#72

Post by aspenmayer » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 9:36 PM UTC

WaitWaitWha wrote: post #56

awb wrote: post #7

The relatively low salaries compared to the huge amounts of power is almost begging for insider trading, influence peddling, etc. > The salary of a Congress member varies based on the job title of the congressman or senator. Most senators, representatives, delegates and the resident commissioner from Puerto Rico make a salary of $174,000 per year. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/pay-salary/congressman-... Then a…

just to expand, indeed their salaries are relative average. But, their benefits package both during and after tenure is generous. Their package include health & life insurance outside the general public market, social security, FERS, CSRS, personnel & office and mail allowances, office space, furniture, office equipment, food, laundry, and much more. It will definitely not make them millionaires, but will allow them…

Don't forget that all Congress members and former members get a fully vested pension after only 5 years in Congress, which can be collected at age 62, or even lower ages for longer time served.

However, the Fed is distinct from Congress. Not sure if the Fed also participates in FERS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_pension

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Employees_Retirement_S...

Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks

#73

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 9:37 PM UTC

awb wrote: post #7

The relatively low salaries compared to the huge amounts of power is almost begging for insider trading, influence peddling, etc. > The salary of a Congress member varies based on the job title of the congressman or senator. Most senators, representatives, delegates and the resident commissioner from Puerto Rico make a salary of $174,000 per year. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/pay-salary/congressman-... Then a…

[deleted]

Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks

#74

Post by fragmede » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 9:41 PM UTC

WaitWaitWha wrote: post #56

awb wrote: post #7

The relatively low salaries compared to the huge amounts of power is almost begging for insider trading, influence peddling, etc. > The salary of a Congress member varies based on the job title of the congressman or senator. Most senators, representatives, delegates and the resident commissioner from Puerto Rico make a salary of $174,000 per year. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/pay-salary/congressman-... Then a…

just to expand, indeed their salaries are relative average. But, their benefits package both during and after tenure is generous. Their package include health & life insurance outside the general public market, social security, FERS, CSRS, personnel & office and mail allowances, office space, furniture, office equipment, food, laundry, and much more. It will definitely not make them millionaires, but will allow them…

Listen, I know we're all senior developers working at a FAANG, making between $300k-500k/year in total compensation, but $160k/yr is a giant pile of money for many, many Americans. The fact that it's $160k + health insurance plan that qualifies as "really fucking good" makes that $160k far more than the already-above-average Joe's 160k.

Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks

#75

Post by Baeocystin » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 9:41 PM UTC

davesque wrote: post #53

dghlsakjg wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Singapore does a good job of matching public servant pay to private sector pay for that exact reason. They go so far as to index government pay scales to private sector pay. The entire intent is to attract very talented people that want to do a good job. Having access to the levers of power is much less of an incentive as a (theoretical) result.

Yeah, that all seems like a great idea. I'm sure Singapore has its issues, but sometimes I think it's funny how logically other countries seem to approach their problems. It's almost as though they actually want to solve them. In the mean time, in the US, we can't have nice things because reasons. It's sort of like how Japan has toilets with warmed seats. In the US, we don't have that because...honestly I have no ide…

Interestingly, the pandemic seems to have greatly spurred the speed of bidet adoption, which includes such things as heated seats.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/14/us-bidet-toi...

I've had one installed in my house for years, and am 100% going to install one wherever I live in the future. The hygiene and comfort improvements are phenomenal.

Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks

#76

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 9:47 PM UTC

aspenmayer wrote: post #72

WaitWaitWha wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

just to expand, indeed their salaries are relative average. But, their benefits package both during and after tenure is generous. Their package include health & life insurance outside the general public market, social security, FERS, CSRS, personnel & office and mail allowances, office space, furniture, office equipment, food, laundry, and much more. It will definitely not make them millionaires, but will allow them…

Don't forget that all Congress members and former members get a fully vested pension after only 5 years in Congress, which can be collected at age 62, or even lower ages for longer time served. However, the Fed is distinct from Congress. Not sure if the Fed also participates in FERS. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_pension https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Employees_Retirement_S...

> Don’t forget that all Congress members and former members get a fully vested pension after only 5 years in Congress

Fully vested, but at 1.0% of the top 3 years salary per year of service. So, sure, at 5 years of service @ 174K per year, they could draw pension at 62 – but that pension would only be $8,700/year.

Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks

#77

Post by sgent » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 9:47 PM UTC

gnopgnip wrote: post #33

slowmovintarget wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they can. Current law in that respect does not apply to members of Congress, IIRC. Instead, Congress has decided that its members should: 1. Self-report on themselves, their spouses, their dependent children (why dependent children would be trading securities is beyond me, but OK.) 2. Be subject to a $200 fine for conflicts of interest or failure to report "in a timely manner" 3. Have the fine waived at…

The SEC can still pursue criminal charges

The SEC even in overt insider trading cases doesn't pursue criminal charges -- they refer it to the Justice Department.

Congress currently is exempt from insider trading that comes about due to executing congressional duties. They would have to pass a law subjecting themselves to it.

Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks

#78

Post by bcrosby95 » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 9:47 PM UTC

brodouevencode wrote: post #2

Does anyone think the SEC will take similar actions against elected officials? Given there have been plenty of stories about this happening it seems like it should be up for consideration.

It's literally not their job, because elected officials made it not their job. If you don't like that, it's our job to vote them out.

But that can't happen. Because people are more likely to vote for a knowingly corrupt politician as long as they're in the right party, over another politician in the wrong party.

Probably - in part - because of conditioning by our politicians, scaring us that the other "side" is going to do something real bad if they ever "win". Nevermind the other "side" "wins" every 8 years or so.

I don't say this disparagingly. I think I suffer from it to some extent too. I just don't know what to do about it and it makes me sad.

Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks

#79

Post by 01100011 » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 9:48 PM UTC

awb wrote: post #7

The relatively low salaries compared to the huge amounts of power is almost begging for insider trading, influence peddling, etc. > The salary of a Congress member varies based on the job title of the congressman or senator. Most senators, representatives, delegates and the resident commissioner from Puerto Rico make a salary of $174,000 per year. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/pay-salary/congressman-... Then a…

I feel the same thing can apply to cops too. I'm all for paying people in these positions market rate or even slightly above. That has to be coupled with effective oversight and higher penalties which are actually enforced. We need to stop treating white collar crime lighter than blue collar crime.

Re: Fed to ban policymakers from owning individual stocks

#80

Post by dragonwriter » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 9:48 PM UTC

gnopgnip wrote: post #33

slowmovintarget wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they can. Current law in that respect does not apply to members of Congress, IIRC. Instead, Congress has decided that its members should: 1. Self-report on themselves, their spouses, their dependent children (why dependent children would be trading securities is beyond me, but OK.) 2. Be subject to a $200 fine for conflicts of interest or failure to report "in a timely manner" 3. Have the fine waived at…

The SEC can still pursue criminal charges

> The SEC can still pursue criminal charges

The SEC can refer apparent criminal violations to the Department of Justice, which is the only federal agency which can pursue criminal charges.