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

171–180 of 192 posts

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#171

Post by handrous »

willcipriano wrote: post #109
handrous wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Is it your assertion that the poor did not consume tea in late 1700's America?

The Tea Act was (among other things) intended to, and probably did, lower the price of tea in America. It hurt smugglers and tea importers.

> I always assumed the Sons of Liberty had both wealthy and more middle class members.

Any non-landowners who participated (were there many?) got had, then, since they couldn't vote under the original constitution and state laws at the time. They also didn't get a say in the drafting of the constitution or in ratifying it (I mean, obviously, who wants them stinking up the place?)

"But they got representation—just not the right to vote, or to run for many offices" Sure, but that's awfully close to an argument from the other side of the Atlantic, that rich British citizens in America didn't find convincing when it was applied to them:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_representation

[EDIT] All I'm saying is, we're a country the founding principle of which is basically "it's not who your parents are that make you worthwhile—it's having money". That was the fundamental disagreement between the Colonies (that is: the people who drove us to war, and who formed the government afterward) and Britain. Given our veneration of that founding, it's unsurprising that a country still operating under a constitution drafted by slavers and drug smugglers would tend, perhaps even more than other places, to be run by particularly scummy rich people with little shame about the shady ways they make their money.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#172

Post by minsc__and__boo »

fennecfoxen wrote: post #154
minsc__and__boo wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

She's the Speaker of the House. Outstanding legislation proposed by the President of the United States (a member of her political party) would subsidize the electric vehicle sector to the tune of $174 billion. If you don't think this gives rise to the appearance of impropriety, then what precisely does?

>would subsidize the electric vehicle sector to the tune of $174 billion

The U.S. infrastructure deal was unanimously supported by all members of the house, not just the speaker.

This type of uncertainty/doubt argument can go both ways. Her spouse lost money on that specific option call, so that could also be proof she didn't use her influence.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#173

Post by lotsofpulp »

renewiltord wrote: post #127
lotsofpulp wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Warren Buffet has not had much luck since the Goldman Sachs investment in 2008. If anything, he's had a few investments flop (IBM, Kraft Heinz) and missed out on a ton of growth from not being in tech. I assume BRK is keeping up with the market due to its significant AAPL holdings.

So much for value investing, eh? Looks like tech stocks are where it's at.

Tech stocks delivering stellar profits and profit margins, increasing quarter after quarter for years, is value investing to me.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#174

Post by weaksauce »

boomboomsubban wrote: post #121
weaksauce wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you understand vetos are something congress can override right?

Vetoing the bill would have at least made the passage more notable, and likely required there to have been more than thirty seconds of debate on the topic. Making them override a veto has some value.

again it's not a partisan issue... literally both parties are passing these bills almost unanimously. it's a class issue i'll give you but not a partisan one.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#175

Post by jedimind »

wil421 wrote: post #86
bagacrap wrote: post #61

"This is pretty incredible, for an average return of her stocks and options is 56.15%. The S&P, with its raucous best performing year, is only up 36% from last June" Strange to compare against sp500 when her holdings are more aligned with NASDAQ, up ~50% from last June.

Hey man they are trying to make news and get clicks. Doing a favorable comparison isn’t going to get traffic.

The most common symbol of comparison is the s&p500, you'll usually find it as first suggested symbol among the most popular charting software (tradingview for instance)

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#177

Post by fennecfoxen »

minsc__and__boo wrote: post #172
fennecfoxen wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She's the Speaker of the House. Outstanding legislation proposed by the President of the United States (a member of her political party) would subsidize the electric vehicle sector to the tune of $174 billion. If you don't think this gives rise to the appearance of impropriety, then what precisely does?

>would subsidize the electric vehicle sector to the tune of $174 billion The U.S. infrastructure deal was unanimously supported by all members of the house, not just the speaker. This type of uncertainty/doubt argument can go both ways. Her spouse lost money on that specific option call, so that could also be proof she didn't use her influence.

> The U.S. infrastructure deal was unanimously supported

No it wasn't. By all members with a (D) after the name who she leads, perhaps, and some others, but not all.

> that could also be proof she didn't use her influence

I don't find this a compelling enough argument that it would likely restore the public's lost trust in these institutions.

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#178

Post by mardifoufs »

dukeofdoom wrote: post #80

This has been debunked over and over starting in 2012. Nanci Pelosi is not part of a crime family. Stop trying to claim otherwise. Snopes debunked this okay like 2 years ago. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/nancy-pelosi-crime-family/

I'm pretty sure your comment is tongue in cheek but wow this is a pretty bad look for snopes:

>Was Nancy Pelosi’s brother, Franklin D. Roosevelt D’Alesandro, charged with lying during a rape trial? Status: MIXTURE The Facts: Nancy Pelosi’s brother, Franklin D. Roosevelt D’Alesandro, was charged with perjury during a rape trial in the 1950s. However, he was eventually acquitted of those charges

How is that a mixture? The poster claims he has been charged, not convicted, Snopes confirms he was charged but... Ends up labelling this as mixed? That's pure damage control from Snopes at this point

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#179

Post by BurningFrog »

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 consistent beating of the odds is what makes it suspicious.

If you roll 12 with two dice, it is not suspicious. If you do it 10 times in a row, my trust is gone!

Re: Pelosi and a lifetime of trading

#180

Post by renewiltord »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #173
renewiltord wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So much for value investing, eh? Looks like tech stocks are where it's at.

Tech stocks delivering stellar profits and profit margins, increasing quarter after quarter for years, is value investing to me.

But not to the BRK boys, who underweight tech.
Post reply on HN