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

Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

unusualwhales.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 192 posts

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#101

Post by robbmorganf »

Just an observation: IF we take it as GIVEN that policymakers are going to find a way to earn some fixed amount X which is greater than their salary (this is a big assumption and probably not true, but just for a thought experiment)

THEN maybe making money from stock options is actually better than taking money from lobbyists? Lawmakers can make money from both hurting and helping companies, so it doesn't create a particular incentive to go out and help PARTICULAR companies (that said, there is an incentive to create volatility, which isn't great). Meanwhile, lobbying tends to advantage some of the least ethical companies (e.g. Opiods, fossil fuels) because the only incentive is to HELP the company at the expense of customers.

To be clear, I don't think it's right for lawmakers to make any more by virtue of their position than the salaries set forth by the law. I'm just saying that of the several unethical ways they can make money, stock options have incentives least misaligned with the public good.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#102

Post by dcassett »

robbrown451 wrote: post #46

Shouldn't HN steer clear of things like this with a political slant? She is a very divisive figure and I don't see how this sort of article makes HN better.

The political climate has piqued my interest in the workings of the US government. I appreciate helpful HN commenters that provide information that I don't have time to research.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#103

Post by alistairSH »

soheil wrote: post #79
alistairSH wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Her husband is making these trades and he’s a longtime active investor and VC.

Did most "longtime active investor and VC[s]" make so much money?

Some do, some don’t. Either way, attributing Nancy Pelosi’s wealth to Something akin to insider trading, when her worth is largely derived from her husband’s investment firm, is torturing the truth just a little bit.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#104

Post by minsc__and__boo »

lefrenchy wrote: post #91
legitster wrote: post #43

Nancy Pelosi's husband is CEO of a investment firm. It shouldn't be that surprising that she tops the list for investments. As others online have pointed out, despite an above average year, her portfolio is still underperforming an S&P 500 index fund with the dividends reinvested. Should politicians be forced to put their assets in a blind trust while in office? Yeah, probably. But I don't think I will indict Pelosi'…

Regardless of returns, buying TSLA leap options is a terrible look and breaks down trust in institutions. How am I supposed to look at that and just trust that she isn’t influencing policy with her options trades in mind? It’s not even about evidence of illegal actions, she’s a public official and part of her job is to build trust with the public.

>buying TSLA leap options is a terrible look and breaks down trust in institutions

What is unusual about her spouse buying TSLA options? I'd say that the TSLA CEO has been more influential over the TSLA price than any new legislation.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#105

Post by amznthrwaway »

weaksauce wrote: post #81
at-fates-hands wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here you go. Happened in 2013 under Obama: But on Monday, when the president signed a bill reversing big pieces of the law, the emailed announcement was one sentence long. There was no fanfare last week either, when the Senate and then the House passed the bill in largely empty chambers using a fast-track procedure known as unanimous consent. https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/04/16/17749...

why make it partisan by mentioning obama like he had anything to do with it as this was passed unanimously by both the senate and the house. just like when someone says "bill clinton repealed glass stegal" no he signed it when it was passed through by veto proof margins with only 2 people dissenting in the senate... he just happened to be the president at the time.

[dead]

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#107

Post by soheil »

wyldfire wrote: post #14

Sorry if this is a stupid question - I've only seen options as a compensation mechanism. Can you buy options on the open market just like shares? If not, how do politicians end up with options?

Yes you can buy options, however, you need a different type of brokerage account to trade options. I believe there is a high minimum amount, a few hundred thousands, to open an account that is able to trade options.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#108

Post by dogorman »

lefrenchy wrote: post #91
legitster wrote: post #43

Nancy Pelosi's husband is CEO of a investment firm. It shouldn't be that surprising that she tops the list for investments. As others online have pointed out, despite an above average year, her portfolio is still underperforming an S&P 500 index fund with the dividends reinvested. Should politicians be forced to put their assets in a blind trust while in office? Yeah, probably. But I don't think I will indict Pelosi'…

Regardless of returns, buying TSLA leap options is a terrible look and breaks down trust in institutions. How am I supposed to look at that and just trust that she isn’t influencing policy with her options trades in mind? It’s not even about evidence of illegal actions, she’s a public official and part of her job is to build trust with the public.

> breaks down trust in institutions.

This is why avoiding the appearance of impropriety is almost as important as avoiding impropriety itself. When you do things that people might reasonably mistake for unethical, it contributes to the perception that such unethical behavior is commonplace. That, in turn, might inspire others to actually behave unethically, or alternatively to despair that they live in such a society. Either is socially harmful.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#109

Post by willcipriano »

handrous wrote: post #53
underseacables wrote: post #7

Congress has some of the richest people in America. I’ve always been intrigued by that.

The country was founded by people who thought taxation without representation was worth fighting a war over, but also thought it completely obvious that they didn't mean representation for poor people (imagine! Poor people with a say in government!), so denied them the franchise. And of course there was the whole thing where it was legal for some folks to own other folks. But taxation (of rich people) without represe…

Is it your assertion that the poor did not consume tea in late 1700's America? I always assumed the Sons of Liberty had both wealthy and more middle class members.
Post reply on HN