Pelosi and a lifetime of trading • Hacker News Board

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#111

Post by ipaddr » Wed, Jul 21, 2021, 5:16 PM UTC

metabagel wrote: post #54

This is mostly her husband's trading, which probably constitutes somewhat of a loophole in the legislation controlling stock purchases by members of congress. Still, the transactions were reported as required, and trading based on insider knowledge is illegal, so he would be subject to prosecution if that's what he was doing. The optics are bad, for sure. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-10/pelosi-hu..…

"he would be subject to prosecution if that's what he was doing"

You would, so would I but history has shown he won't have to worry about that.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#112

Post by pgwhalen » Wed, Jul 21, 2021, 5:16 PM UTC

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'…

> her portfolio is still underperforming an S&P 500 index fund with the dividends reinvested

Can you expand on this? The article indicates her one year returns were considerably higher than the S&P 500 last year.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#113

Post by fighterpilot » Wed, Jul 21, 2021, 5:17 PM UTC

boulos wrote: post #41

The article never says this, but her husband, Paul, is a longtime investor / VC [1]. There’s obviously still a huge opportunity for leakage of information that Nancy Pelosi receives, but the trades don’t actually look suspicious nor requiring non-public information. There was some reporting on this issue more broadly when Senator Burr seemed to place trades directly due to coronavirus information, which included Pelo…

> the trades don’t actually look suspicious nor requiring non-public information.

The purchase was made 1 month before this story[1] broke, which was a significantly market moving announcement.

There's plausible deniability, of course.

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/25/biden-plans-to-replace-gover...

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#114

Post by throwaway0a5e » Wed, Jul 21, 2021, 5:17 PM UTC

tharne wrote: post #69

shadowgovt wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... but it's a pretty big lever. And they don't even have to pass the laws; a person in position of authority can shock a market with a credible threat to take an action. Such a tool was actually used to disrupt a rice panic once. Without releasing any surplus, an announced joint intent to release surplus drove speculators out of the market. https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/11/04/142016962/the-...

I remember Hillary Clinton doing that in 2016 with a single sabre-rattling tweet about the pharma industry.

Obama made some suggestions about normalizing relations with Iran and all the defense stocks went crazy though nothing ever came of it

Politicians suggesting things impacts the market all the time.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#115

Post by KETpXDDzR » Wed, Jul 21, 2021, 5:18 PM UTC

Sounds like smart insider trading. I know some forums only accessible via the TOR network that trade insider info. Your first post is for verification, the ones after for either selling them or trading with others. If you trade your company's quarterly numbers with numbers from another company it's nearly impossible to proof that you used insider information.

IMHO the whole system needs a reformation. You should only be allowed to invest long-term, at least one month, probably years. Day trading and option contracts enable illegal insider trading.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#116

Post by dcolkitt » Wed, Jul 21, 2021, 5:18 PM UTC

boulos wrote: post #41

The article never says this, but her husband, Paul, is a longtime investor / VC [1]. There’s obviously still a huge opportunity for leakage of information that Nancy Pelosi receives, but the trades don’t actually look suspicious nor requiring non-public information. There was some reporting on this issue more broadly when Senator Burr seemed to place trades directly due to coronavirus information, which included Pelo…

Most of Pelosi's homerun trades involved bluechip public stocks. I don't think it's reasonable to expect a VC to have that much edge there. VCs specialize in early stage private companies. That's a very different skillset than trading options on NASDAQ.

If Paul Pelosi really had that much alpha in quarterly moves in ultra-liquid stocks like Microsoft and Disney, he'd almost certainly be a hedge fund manager.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#117

Post by moralestapia » Wed, Jul 21, 2021, 5:18 PM UTC

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'…

>Nancy Pelosi's husband is CEO of a investment firm. It shouldn't be that surprising that she tops the list for investments.

I don't know if you're using this as an argument to favor Pelosi, because this, if anything, is only another conflict of interest on top of where she's currently at.

The disclosure and use of insider information from public companies can get you in big trouble, even if you're married to the people involved.

There's a reason why CEOs (and the like) take HUGE caution measures when liquidating stock and try to involve family as least as possible.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#118

Post by KETpXDDzR » Wed, Jul 21, 2021, 5:19 PM UTC

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'…

"80% of US Fund Managers Underperform S&P 500 Over 5 years"

http://www.ginsglobal.com/articles/80-of-us-fund-managers-un...

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#119

Post by spullara » Wed, Jul 21, 2021, 5:20 PM UTC

pgwhalen wrote: post #112

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'…

> her portfolio is still underperforming an S&P 500 index fund with the dividends reinvested Can you expand on this? The article indicates her one year returns were considerably higher than the S&P 500 last year.

Their returns all time in office are worse.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#120

Post by Clubber » Wed, Jul 21, 2021, 5:20 PM UTC

robbmorganf wrote: post #101

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 pa…

>I'm just saying that of the several unethical ways they can make money, stock options have incentives least misaligned with the public good.

You are assuming that said laws are for the public good and not the good of lobbyists. I would guess this happens more often than not: politicians pass a law that is for lobbyists and against the public good, then make money buying stock against the reaction of said law.

"Never trust a politician," is probably as old as civilization, why do we think ours are any better?

Oh, and when the system finally crumbles from under all the rot, guess who suffers and who doesn't. I'll give a hint, the people who control the police and criminal justice system won't be the ones suffering.