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

Senators to Propose Ban on U.S. Lawmakers, Executive Branch Members Owning Stock

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 238 posts

Re: Senators to Propose Ban on U.S. Lawmakers, Executive Branch Members Owning Stock

#21

Post by justrealist »

thedangler wrote: post #11

Have you seen how much wealth a lot of congress have gained over their careers. There is no way someone can look at those numbers and come to the conclusion that they did become multi millionaires without inside information. It should be banned out right or every position they take is public knowledge within 1 trading day or less. "Representative Nancy Pelosi has made up to $12.5M off of Microsoft stock so far this y…

This is not a good graph. Trade volume is a function of how actively you trade, not total wealth gained, lost or held.

Day-traders have massive "trade volume" relative to those who hold large index funds.

Re: Senators to Propose Ban on U.S. Lawmakers, Executive Branch Members Owning Stock

#22

Post by psychlops »

exabrial wrote: post #16
thedangler wrote: post #11

Have you seen how much wealth a lot of congress have gained over their careers. There is no way someone can look at those numbers and come to the conclusion that they did become multi millionaires without inside information. It should be banned out right or every position they take is public knowledge within 1 trading day or less. "Representative Nancy Pelosi has made up to $12.5M off of Microsoft stock so far this y…

> It should be banned out right or every position they take is public knowledge within 1 trading day or less. Other way around, every position they _plan_ to take is public knowledge 24 hours in advance. EDIT: ==== Other comment says a week, I'm good with that

Really if they simply became subject to the same rules as everyone else that has sensitive insider information, the problem would be solved. Those who work in the investment industry are subject to strict rules.

Re: Senators to Propose Ban on U.S. Lawmakers, Executive Branch Members Owning Stock

#23

Post by ccppurcell »

_ea1k wrote: post #4

In practice, how would this work? A requirement that they only use index funds? But then wouldn't that bias them to support the companies that are the major movers in that index? Indexes are often heavily weighted to a small subset after all. TBH, it seems like an idea that sounds good on the surface but has practical issues in implementation that would make it irrelevant

How about they do their jobs, and put off making money in other ways till after their term ends. Maybe they can buy government bonds.

Re: Senators to Propose Ban on U.S. Lawmakers, Executive Branch Members Owning Stock

#24

Post by carimura »

koolba wrote: post #12
capital_guy wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a ridiculous take. Imperfect is better than bad. Right now you have the Speaker of the House's husband buying $5million worth of Alphabet call options. That's not a good system.

> Right now you have the Speaker of the House's husband buying $5million worth of Alphabet call options. That’s patently false. Nancy Pelosi is no longer Speaker of the House. The former Speaker of the House’s husband was the one doing all that.

haha. I think this is sarcasm? anyways, she was when the calls were reported.

Re: Senators to Propose Ban on U.S. Lawmakers, Executive Branch Members Owning Stock

#25

Post by jchanimal »

_lb0d wrote: post #14

My wife works in the audit department of a bank. I'm heavily regulated by the SEC on what stocks, ETFs, mutual funds I can buy/sell. An internal group monitors my buying/selling and makes approval/denial before I can do so. I have to hold an ETF for 1 month before I can sell it--not that I should be swing trading ETFs, but still. It's very frustrating at times, especially when I'm relegated to using just her bank's t…

I think is standard practice at larger firms in the banking industry, it should be for government as well.

Re: Senators to Propose Ban on U.S. Lawmakers, Executive Branch Members Owning Stock

#27

Post by lacraig2 »

koolba wrote: post #12
capital_guy wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a ridiculous take. Imperfect is better than bad. Right now you have the Speaker of the House's husband buying $5million worth of Alphabet call options. That's not a good system.

> Right now you have the Speaker of the House's husband buying $5million worth of Alphabet call options. That’s patently false. Nancy Pelosi is no longer Speaker of the House. The former Speaker of the House’s husband was the one doing all that.

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/909/991/48c...

Re: Senators to Propose Ban on U.S. Lawmakers, Executive Branch Members Owning Stock

#28

Post by lesuorac »

ccppurcell wrote: post #23
_ea1k wrote: post #4

In practice, how would this work? A requirement that they only use index funds? But then wouldn't that bias them to support the companies that are the major movers in that index? Indexes are often heavily weighted to a small subset after all. TBH, it seems like an idea that sounds good on the surface but has practical issues in implementation that would make it irrelevant

How about they do their jobs, and put off making money in other ways till after their term ends. Maybe they can buy government bonds.

Or perhaps the salary of congress critters /etc should be significantly higher than it is.

Is the CEO of Tesla (~50B ?) really more impactful than the US president (~400k/yr) ?

Re: Senators to Propose Ban on U.S. Lawmakers, Executive Branch Members Owning Stock

#29

Post by giantg2 »

jqpabc123 wrote: post #2

All show and no go. Like most such "reforms", it is intended for naive public consumption while also being easily circumvented. Setup a trust or corporation run by a family member and continue with business a usual.

If the restrictions are similar to restrictions by the SEC or financial institutions, having more than 10% ownership over a company or control over a trust would also violate those restrictions.

Re: Senators to Propose Ban on U.S. Lawmakers, Executive Branch Members Owning Stock

#30

Post by anonym29 »

bell-cot wrote: post #19
anonym29 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't a reason to not support the current effort. Democracy is an iterative process, not a magic wand that you wave to instantly teleport to a flawless system. This bill is step one. When (not if) it gets circumvented, that's when the next law addressing that problem can be passed.

> ...iterative process... ...When (not if it gets circumvented), that's when... If the politicians manage the process correctly, they can forever be passing "reform bills" which sound good...but have enough loopholes so that nothing resembling actual reform ever happens. Rule of Thumb: If somebody claims they want to build a transportation system, then starts with a square wheel and talks about improving it as the ne…

Inefficient action being taken is still better than absolutely zero action being taken in addressing a problem.

Think, for instance, about how many more people might become aware of / interested in the problem, who were previously unaware or uninterested in insider stock trading by members of congress, should a historic bill be passed to initialize the process of stopping the problem.

Post reply on HN