Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Congress Needs to Stop Day Trading, Says Sen. Mark Warner

bigtechnology.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 169 posts

Re: Congress Needs to Stop Day Trading, Says Sen. Mark Warner

#141

Post by kjeetgill »

belter wrote: post #105
DantesKite wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A fairer framing would be, “Does increasing salaries of politicians decrease corruption, increase it, or make no difference whatsoever due to other factors?” I suspect it helps more than it hurts since it seems to be a successful policy in Singapore. I’m skeptical decreasing the salaries would help because competent people would work elsewhere.

Denmark and New Zealand are perceived as some of the least corrupt nations, at least in perception, and politicians do not earn anything close to US politicians.

I think it's fair to look to other countries for possible outcomes to consider, but I also think the specifics of how these things play out would vary a lot country to country.

Re: Congress Needs to Stop Day Trading, Says Sen. Mark Warner

#142

Post by imtringued »

ISL wrote: post #28

Members of Congress make ~$174k/yr. [1] It will be an unpopular opinion, but I believe that we should pay better (and demand better) for a job with that much responsibility. Otherwise, a congressperson will be forever tempted to align their incentives with service to causes other than their electorate. I'm fairly certain we should be paying our elected officials at least as much as our football coaches. [1] https://w…

Or maybe you shouldn't build a society around making capital gains and interest income from doing no work as that encourages politicians to become corrupt for a quick 10 million bucks and thereby let them off off dividends or stock buybacks long after their political career ended.

All those people that pretend to understand that interest rates affect discounted future values seem to forget that this is also creating short term thinking where destroying something (potentially long lived) to get money today is profitable and encouraged.

Re: Congress Needs to Stop Day Trading, Says Sen. Mark Warner

#143

Post by imtringued »

IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #71
ISL wrote: post #28

Members of Congress make ~$174k/yr. [1] It will be an unpopular opinion, but I believe that we should pay better (and demand better) for a job with that much responsibility. Otherwise, a congressperson will be forever tempted to align their incentives with service to causes other than their electorate. I'm fairly certain we should be paying our elected officials at least as much as our football coaches. [1] https://w…

No. Hell no. Elected office is a sacrifice and a duty. It is not a way to make a living. Thats how you end up with dinosaurs working those halls for 68 years. I have a better idea. 1)Fix salary at 2x poverty wage. 2) make house members 1:50,000 representation to their county (yes that means the house would explode to 8000 elected officials) 3) tax any earnings above their pre-office historical income avg, at say 98%.…

Why sacrifice yourself before your political career ended? Why not do it afterwards with extremely high capital gains and income taxes (100% tax for anything above $200k) for retired politicians?

Re: Congress Needs to Stop Day Trading, Says Sen. Mark Warner

#144

Post by hnhamdani2 »

belter wrote: post #105
DantesKite wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A fairer framing would be, “Does increasing salaries of politicians decrease corruption, increase it, or make no difference whatsoever due to other factors?” I suspect it helps more than it hurts since it seems to be a successful policy in Singapore. I’m skeptical decreasing the salaries would help because competent people would work elsewhere.

Denmark and New Zealand are perceived as some of the least corrupt nations, at least in perception, and politicians do not earn anything close to US politicians.

you can't compare NZ and DK with US legislative member. The effect of their policy making in terms of nominal number ($$) is multiple order of magnitude different.

I agree with the OP, where in nuance, paying policy maker more would more or less reduce corruption. It doesn't guarantee that it'll work but at least worth the try, cost wise.

Just like in sports gambling, one of the most efficient way to tilt the favor to your bet is pay the arbiter.

Re: Congress Needs to Stop Day Trading, Says Sen. Mark Warner

#145

Post by threatofrain »

Rd6n6 wrote: post #92
belter wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has been proven multiple times, that already very well paid company managers, will accept bribes for small amounts of money and petty motives. Integrity is not connected to how well someone is paid. Reckless behavior for minor motives that makes people risk careers of years, family responsibilities, seems the norm for some individuals. I collect these cases, as they fascinate me on what they say about human nature…

Can you share some of these cases or research?

We had a governor selling Obama’s senate seat for a garage sale discount.

Re: Congress Needs to Stop Day Trading, Says Sen. Mark Warner

#146

Post by yunohn »

ISL wrote: post #28

Members of Congress make ~$174k/yr. [1] It will be an unpopular opinion, but I believe that we should pay better (and demand better) for a job with that much responsibility. Otherwise, a congressperson will be forever tempted to align their incentives with service to causes other than their electorate. I'm fairly certain we should be paying our elected officials at least as much as our football coaches. [1] https://w…

I strongly do not believe that higher salaries will change anything.

In every country I’ve lived in, politicians are not there for the formal salary/responsibilities. Those are tangential.

Political roles attract people who want power and control. The networking of favours is expected and emphasised - with money being the underlying foundation for it all.

This is all quite obvious social science, and I’d be curious to hear others thoughts.

Re: Congress Needs to Stop Day Trading, Says Sen. Mark Warner

#147

Post by iamleppert »

reidjs wrote: post #55
iamleppert wrote: post #30

How is it acceptable for them to engage in these activities while on the job? It should be illegal based upon their job duties. During office hours, and while at the office, like everyone else, they should be required to carry out their job duties and not engage in personal or outside activities. Trading stocks and the like has nothing to do with their job and should not be done while at your job. If a congress perso…

Are you 100% focused all the time when you're at work? I think it's a bit unrealistic to expect that kind of focus from anyone at any job. If they're getting their work done, I don't see the harm in trading stocks ASSUMING they are playing by the rules, i.e., not insider trading.

I think there’s a difference between reading the news or social media occasionally at work and doing something like trading stocks. It falls into the realm of work. I know some people trade stocks for leisure but the vast majority do it to make money.

Is it right to work another job for profit at your employer or while your employer is expecting you to be doing work on behalf of them? According to my moral compass, that’s a no. I would be pretty upset if I found one of my employees trading stocks while they were supposed to be working. Especially if my approval of them was low, which is the current situation with many government officials right now. If there was agreement on both sides before taking a job, that would be different but I find that hard to believe before taking a job someone would admit to that, and that’s a sign they know it’s wrong.

They have a lot of nerve thinking this is acceptable behavior when the country is in the middle of a crisis and has a lot of problems to solve.

Re: Congress Needs to Stop Day Trading, Says Sen. Mark Warner

#148

Post by okamiueru »

ramesh31 wrote: post #5

Awkward title. It implies congress is considering a ban on retail day trading.

I wish every time someone complained about a title, they included the title at the time. HN moderators are very quick to correct issues, and it leaves the comment and the rest wondering "what is wrong with it?"

Re: Congress Needs to Stop Day Trading, Says Sen. Mark Warner

#149

Post by chiefalchemist »

notacoward wrote: post #100
chiefalchemist wrote: post #23

If you've ever wondered why anyone would run for Congress given the pay, this is your answer. What's amazing is how many of them will shamelessly promote the idea of corruption in other countries, and then day trade and grasp their hypeocricy.

That's absolutely correct. It's far from the only way they profit from their offices, but it's certainly one way. It's shameful that you were downvoted for making the point.

I stopped worrying about down votes and HN dysfunction a while ago.

That aside, such information is a form of currency, and done right...untraceable. A term or two in office, is temporary. The involvement in this currency is forever.

Re: Congress Needs to Stop Day Trading, Says Sen. Mark Warner

#150

Post by q1w2 »

UIUC_06 wrote: post #117

All the discussion about how much Senators and Representatives should be paid and whether it leads to bribery misses the most important moral point, which is: They are in a position to influence stocks, and hence must be barred from owning them, other than in a blind trust. It's the same moral principle as "Judges must recuse themselves from cases in which they have a financial interest." We want them to vote on regu…

I have trouble with the escalation of demands being made on social media.

Initially the titles talked about banning "insider trading", despite them not legally being insiders (which is a very specific legal term which refers to company employees/agents which specific non-public corporate information).

The the titles talk about banning "day-trading", which is trading in-out of stocks multiple times per day. They are almost certainly NOT doing that.

...now you're saying they cannot even have any stock ownership - which would imply they cannot have a 401k or 529 for their kids (because those invest in funds) - or even a vanilla money-market savings account at any bank.

Taking this logic further, they shouldn't be allowed to own any financial assets - bonds, real estate, etc...

These arguments have lost touch with reality.

Post reply on HN