Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would determine whether the SEC will investigate for insider trading? I would expect them to be shielded from executive pressure.
[flagged]
Except the military.
$70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money
31–40 of 480 posts
Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money
#32> We don’t know who placed the trades. We don’t know what they knew. Actually, “we”, collectively, do know, because the SEC maintains an “XKEYSCORE for equities” called CAT. If there was interest, the government could know exactly who placed these trades. But the call (options) are coming from inside the house.
No economic system is functional without a bunch of compromises, and capitalism needs strong regulations as a check to keep it from turning absolutely rotten. We're witnessing the removal of all of the guardrails, traffic signals, road maintenance crews. The highway patrols have been replaced by organized teams of highwaymen. It'll get a lot worse before it gets better.
It depends on what you mean by 'strong regulations'. Regulations that are on the books should be enforced as written. In that sense I agree. But it doesn't mean that we actually necessarily need all the regulations that are on the books to stay on the books.
Eg, it would be perfectly fine to make insider trading legal by law. (And in fact, the definition of insider trading in the US differs a lot from the one used in France. So there are lots of things that have long been legal in the US that would have been illegal in France, without the economy collapsing.)
I agree that random enforcement of some regulations but not others depending on the whim of the executive is less than ideal.
Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money
#33> We don’t know who placed the trades. We don’t know what they knew. Actually, “we”, collectively, do know, because the SEC maintains an “XKEYSCORE for equities” called CAT. If there was interest, the government could know exactly who placed these trades. But the call (options) are coming from inside the house.
You keep the receipts for about 4 years and you speak up one minute after the government changes. You get it done long before the following election.
With a bit of luck, you only have to wait for 2 years, when Congress changes hands.
Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money
#34The stock market needs to just be deleted. It’s the insider trading scam machine of the rich class. The whole goal of the stock market is to come up with information that people don’t generally have (insider trading) either from research, or secret info, so you can dupe everyone else’s money.
Delete along with publicly traded companies, or what’s the plan?
Socialism. Worked well in the past (:
Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money
#35> We don’t know who placed the trades. We don’t know what they knew. Actually, “we”, collectively, do know, because the SEC maintains an “XKEYSCORE for equities” called CAT. If there was interest, the government could know exactly who placed these trades. But the call (options) are coming from inside the house.
No economic system is functional without a bunch of compromises, and capitalism needs strong regulations as a check to keep it from turning absolutely rotten. We're witnessing the removal of all of the guardrails, traffic signals, road maintenance crews. The highway patrols have been replaced by organized teams of highwaymen. It'll get a lot worse before it gets better.
I recently read someone's comment here stating that "trust is efficient."
What we are witnessing is the devolution of the USA from a high-trust to low-trust business environment. "Low-trust business environment" is the euphemism we have used to describe other countries, where corruption is rampant. This is so sad to watch.
Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money
#36Inside trading on political information is legal in the US.
Nancy Pelosi (Democrat) made this famous in last decade, hitting news headlines with it:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/nancy-pelosi-outperformed-nea...
https://nypost.com/2024/09/27/us-news/trump-calls-for-nancy-...
Inside trading rules concern only leaking corporate-private insider information.
Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money
#37404 Media reported a story on Monday[1] about a news outlet that claimed there'd be a 90-day break on tariffs for all countries besides China. This was published a few days before the official announcement.
So someone, somewhere, knew something before everyone else.
[1] https://www.404media.co/benzinga-news-service-that-falsely-r...
Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money
#38The follow-up post shows the whole magnitude of the insider trading:
> My previous post highlighted a striking example: how a single $2.5 million options position turned into $70 million in under an hour. But focusing solely on that trade risks missing the larger picture. What we actually saw was widespread activity. Numerous sophisticated traders carefully placing positions across several strike prices ($504, $505, $507, $509) in SPY as well as similar trades in QQQ.
> The pattern wasn't limited to a single trade or strike price. It was a coordinated wave of positions, all established within a critical half-hour window before the news broke.
> Imagine someone purchasing thousands of lottery tickets with a specific number combination just moments before those exact numbers are drawn.
https://data-and-politics.ghost.io/this-is-what-insider-trad...
Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money
#39> We don’t know who placed the trades. We don’t know what they knew. Actually, “we”, collectively, do know, because the SEC maintains an “XKEYSCORE for equities” called CAT. If there was interest, the government could know exactly who placed these trades. But the call (options) are coming from inside the house.
What would determine whether the SEC will investigate for insider trading? I would expect them to be shielded from executive pressure.
Who would be doing the shielding? The current US government has been operating under the assumption of an incredibly expansive executive power, even over "independent" agencies.
I'm not a legal expert at all but so far the most useful mental model has been to assume absolutely no one is shielded from executive power (including organizations and people entirely outside the federal government) unless the courts have delivered a final ruling on it.
Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
No economic system is functional without a bunch of compromises, and capitalism needs strong regulations as a check to keep it from turning absolutely rotten. We're witnessing the removal of all of the guardrails, traffic signals, road maintenance crews. The highway patrols have been replaced by organized teams of highwaymen. It'll get a lot worse before it gets better.
It depends on what you mean by 'strong regulations'. Regulations that are on the books should be enforced as written. In that sense I agree. But it doesn't mean that we actually necessarily need all the regulations that are on the books to stay on the books. Eg, it would be perfectly fine to make insider trading legal by law. (And in fact, the definition of insider trading in the US differs a lot from the one used in…
You could make insider trading legal by law, but that would destroy a lot of the stock market because all non-insiders would basically set themselves up to be ripped off.