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

$70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

data-and-politics.ghost.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 480 posts

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#211

Post by labster »

master-lincoln wrote: post #190
eastbound wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know I’ll be downvoted but, since we’re going straight for scorched land, I prefer to voice it. I think most voters think like me “I still prefer Trump to a leftist government”: - Was there any need to be so extreme in terms of wokeness on the left? I am directly threatened by their program. Was there really any need to go for such a degree of revolution, ensuring everyone sensical would vote Trump? Could the left…

What left are you talking about? The Democratic Party in the USA would be seen as neo-liberals too from outside the US. Calling it "the left" just shows how delusional the society in the USA seems to have become...

I agree, but I would also like to add that the Republican Party is not a conservative party, either. Trump brags about raising taxes on so many imports. And the current administration never saw a Chesterton’s fence they didn’t want to tear down. The party as a whole seems to be pretty happy with it.

So that’s America, no options if you want to vote for a liberal party or a conservative party.

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#212

Post by sethammons »

aetherspawn wrote: post #70
random3 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Delete along with publicly traded companies, or what’s the plan?

It makes sense to allow public investment in companies, but base it off (regulated) external valuation rather than real time supply/demand. Have a limit on how frequently a company can get revalued (months). Do everything possible to make it a long term investment tool and not something that can be easily gamed. This is also less stressful for the individual investor — most people I know who trade stocks also check t…

> (regulated) external valuation

Is that not the SEC and Generally Accepted Accounting Principals (GAAP)?

> Have a limit on how frequently a company can get revalued (months).

Is that not quarterly reports and earnings filings?

> Do everything possible to make it a long term investment tool and not something that can be easily gamed

Your suggestion was to delete it. One suggestion I've heard is to increase the transaction price, and marginally increase it with trading volume by the given actor. Micro-transactions become too expensive to be profitable.

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#213

Post by eastbound »

miramba wrote: post #186
eastbound wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know I’ll be downvoted but, since we’re going straight for scorched land, I prefer to voice it. I think most voters think like me “I still prefer Trump to a leftist government”: - Was there any need to be so extreme in terms of wokeness on the left? I am directly threatened by their program. Was there really any need to go for such a degree of revolution, ensuring everyone sensical would vote Trump? Could the left…

> wokeness on the left… I am directly threatened by their program. Could you please explain what that threat is exactly, and what kind of “concessions to white males” you would have in mind?

I’ll candidly assume that this is not a rhetorical question aimed at making me pass as a spoiled child, as is frequent with leftism:

- AOC, known as “the squad” (!), has claimed the Congress has too many white males. President Macron said the same about the US tech sector, and he’s not even part of the extremists, so this issue permeates society. Basically everyone says white men should be fewer of them. This is a direct threat.

- Feminism was supposed to give women more place at work and give family a better representation of both genders at home. What happened: Men can’t apply for some jobs anymore; while men are assumed to not merit to see the children by default at home. This has been going on since the 1980 in every developed country, moreso in France and US, a little less in Sweden. Judges and lawyer family courts are often 100%-women (80.2% in the profession).

- We helped women when they were 38% of the university students. But they crossed the 50% in 1990. Men now represent 39% of university students. Do we help them? No, we drop help programs. And Sweden also dropped equality programs the moment men were in need.

This is what various groups have been militanting for years, but they were harassed into submission by the left (from Facebook’s pro-left censorship at the time, to directly burning their cars or killing their dogs, and of course cancelling conference centers for men support groups which they presented as extremists - which is true, men are angry).

How is Trump helping?

- His program basis is based on a meritocratic econonic theory (that does not favour women, which is all the left complains about), but, granted, elected presidents generally implement another program, and Trump isn’t helping much,

- Men thrive in both meritocracies and in the wilderness/lawlessness, because they work more. To this, Trump has choosen the latter. The more economic crisis there is is, the weaker the government, and the more women will need men. Given the left’s program is “let’s take men’s/white’s people money”, the scorched earth is the best situation.

Granted, it would be nicer if leftists didn’t hate white men’s guts so much that they could listen to them when they make reasonable demands such as equity in family courts or meritocracy at the workplace. Barring being sensible…

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#215

Post by dragonwriter »

eastbound wrote: post #213
miramba wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> wokeness on the left… I am directly threatened by their program. Could you please explain what that threat is exactly, and what kind of “concessions to white males” you would have in mind?

I’ll candidly assume that this is not a rhetorical question aimed at making me pass as a spoiled child, as is frequent with leftism: - AOC, known as “the squad” (!), has claimed the Congress has too many white males. President Macron said the same about the US tech sector, and he’s not even part of the extremists, so this issue permeates society. Basically everyone says white men should be fewer of them. This is a di…

> AOC, known as “the squad”

Well, when you get that basic of a fact wrong,...

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#216

Post by rvz »

Jensson wrote: post #169
LeafItAlone wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s be real: Pelosi became famous for it because right-leaning groups were looking for yet another thing to put on her and then it was picked up by WSB and became a meme. Pelosi’s rate of return isn’t the highest (in 2024, it was 10th, less than half the highest). If you analyze their trades, very few are suspect of timing. They just make a bunch of long term bets on tech. https://www.fool.com/research/congressiona…

> If you analyze their trades, very few are suspect of timing. They just make a bunch of long term bets on tech. But what about the ones that very obviously are? Why did they sell a lot of Visa stocks? "On Tuesday, less than three months after the massive transaction, Visa was hit with a DOJ lawsuit alleging that the company illegally monopolized the debit card market." Selling whenever a company gets into regulatory…

> But what about the ones that very obviously are? Why did they sell a lot of Visa stocks?

That's a good question and let's use that example.

According to the article and as you mentioned, they sold Visa stock less than 3 months ago and THEN the DOJ filed a lawsuit against the company.

So how did Pelosi know that that would cause the stock to drop and the DOJ was going to file it? The lawsuit wasn't public months ago and it is related to none other than the government which she has access to.

Then she traded with that information with no downside risk which she benefited from.

If that is not an insider trading loophole, I don't know what is.

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#217

Post by jgyter »

tmcb wrote: post #178
eastbound wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know I’ll be downvoted but, since we’re going straight for scorched land, I prefer to voice it. I think most voters think like me “I still prefer Trump to a leftist government”: - Was there any need to be so extreme in terms of wokeness on the left? I am directly threatened by their program. Was there really any need to go for such a degree of revolution, ensuring everyone sensical would vote Trump? Could the left…

> I am directly threatened by their program. […] Could the left imagine being a little more democratic and making a few more concessions towards… omg, white males? I am not from the US, I am originally from Latin America. I am considered a “white male” there. I am now living in Europe as I am a dual citizen. This kind of position is interesting to me. What is so bad about being a white male in the USA at the moment?…

[flagged]

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#218

Post by eastbound »

fabian2k wrote: post #198
eastbound wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know I’ll be downvoted but, since we’re going straight for scorched land, I prefer to voice it. I think most voters think like me “I still prefer Trump to a leftist government”: - Was there any need to be so extreme in terms of wokeness on the left? I am directly threatened by their program. Was there really any need to go for such a degree of revolution, ensuring everyone sensical would vote Trump? Could the left…

They're not saving money so far, they have been spending more money than the government spent in 2024. And in those cases where they will spend less they also did enormous damage, e.g. cancelling clinical trials midway through. This is pure destruction, not efficiency. And your woke argument is a pure strawman. What were those extreme positions by Kamala Harris?

The “Trump is doing the opposite of his program” yields no constructive argument. Because voting for the opposite movement wouldn’t have made the left suddenly implement meritocratic capitalism.

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#219

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

Isn't this kind of thing going to destroy "trust" in the markets? Basically, people who don't have access to the advance/inside information will lose money to those that do - similar to betting in a casino where you know the odds are against you.

This could lead to a lot of investment in the U.S. being diverted elsewhere to markets that have some kind of regulation to prevent abuse.

Re: $70M in 60 Seconds: How Insider Info Helped Someone 28x Their Money

#220

Post by az226 »

svg7 wrote: post #19

While I have no doubt that insider trading happens quite regularly, I would not jump to that conclusion here. IIRC the previous day, big Wall street names were advocating for a pause in tariffs . So a lot of people placed bets accordingly. Also staking 2.5M is "small change" for true insiders.

But these rumors were said and talked about several days. But no big options trade was made before the actual day of announcement. That’s why it’s telling.
Post reply on HN