3 ms·

Complaint is a strong word, I'm not an employee myself, I'm just trying to think about what is fair :) > That investors later trade that stock back and forth b

Complaint is a strong word, I'm not an employee myself, I'm just trying to think about what is fair :) > That investors later trade that stock back and forth between themselves doesn't affect the company who already got paid. This is where we don't agree. I've seen plenty of times companies that made profit being moved to other countries where work is cheaper, or companies that were doing not so well asking salary cuts, then not giving salary back when things were doing better, and distributing bonus instead. Now that I'm in trading, I know why : this is a mean to produce "good news" and make stock rise. There is unfairness to employees, there, and people are getting more and more angry against finance because of that, this will end badly. This is why I think allowing them to trade insider news - maybe with a moderate amount of money maximum - could defuse potential conflict. We could say to employees : "yes, stock value is a prime to us. But look, you can make good with it doing your own easy profits". It doesn't have to be about millions. Most employees would be very happy with an extra $500 here and there. The message sent by making insider trading a crime could be heard that way : we're making money with your work that we don't really care about because we won't own stock from your company a year from now, we're deteriorating your work environment, and we'll punish you if you try to join the party.

oelmekki 9y ago
Here's an other idea : insider trading could be allowed only for buying on good news. That way, there won't be people owning stock losing big money without warning. Investors won't have a chance to buy stock, but this is a miss opportunity, not harm, and they'll have plenty other opportunities elsewhere, or they can even jump in during rise and still make profit, just smaller than usual. It could even be a good thing : I love to trade small amount during big unpredicted spikes, because their pullback is big as well for a few minutes, and I often make my day just on those (when there's no news and no TA reason, moves get crazy). It would harm shorters, but since those ones are wishing harm to the company, it still seems fair.
- gnaritas 9y ago
  > It would harm shorters, but since those ones are wishing harm to the company, it still seems fair. No, it isn't fair; this notion that shorters are somehow bad guys is bigotry. Shorters are just as important as those who go long in keeping prices accurate, they are not bad in any way and thinking it's "fair" to fuck them is a symptom you don't understand the market. Shorters don't wish harm on companies, rather they see companies are irrationally overvalued or see the company is doing something to risky or behaving badly and expect the stock price to fall. Don't be a bigot against trading one directly over the other, they're both the same. And no, no insider trading at all, it's always stealing; you can't come up with a way to justify stealing. It's not ok to steal from investors to make up for being treated unfairly by your company.
gnaritas 9y ago
> The message sent by making insider trading a crime could be heard that way : we're making money with your work that we don't really care about because we won't own stock from your company a year from now, we're deteriorating your work environment, and we'll punish you if you try to join the party. I really don't think you understand the purpose of markets. If you did you wouldn't be having thoughts like this.
- oelmekki 9y ago
  Well, if you refuse to try to understand other points of view, that's your choice. Beware, though : in coming decade, you may find that the whole world "doesn't understand" and acts accordingly. Happy trading.
  - gnaritas 9y ago
    The whole world is going to do what's it's always done, remain a mess of disagreement and be dominated by the rich and serve the interests of the rich.
    - oelmekki 9y ago
      I don't see why rich people are in this discussion. Certainly, should there be a collapse of classic finance, they would move away and just be as rich. This is hardly relevant anyway, because it's not rich people who drive classic finance, it's banks. And banks are major actors because ... they have all the money of the world at their disposal. Should people be angry at banks and move their money from them (let's see... what recent financial innovation could allow people to withdraw their money from banks?), banks would be powerless. By the way, your overconfidence is typical of end of 3rd wave.

oelmekki 9y ago

Here's an other idea : insider trading could be allowed only for buying on good news. That way, there won't be people owning stock losing big money without warning. Investors won't have a chance to buy stock, but this is a miss opportunity, not harm, and they'll have plenty other opportunities elsewhere, or they can even jump in during rise and still make profit, just smaller than usual. It could even be a good thing : I love to trade small amount during big unpredicted spikes, because their pullback is big as well for a few minutes, and I often make my day just on those (when there's no news and no TA reason, moves get crazy). It would harm shorters, but since those ones are wishing harm to the company, it still seems fair.

gnaritas 9y ago
> It would harm shorters, but since those ones are wishing harm to the company, it still seems fair. No, it isn't fair; this notion that shorters are somehow bad guys is bigotry. Shorters are just as important as those who go long in keeping prices accurate, they are not bad in any way and thinking it's "fair" to fuck them is a symptom you don't understand the market. Shorters don't wish harm on companies, rather they see companies are irrationally overvalued or see the company is doing something to risky or behaving badly and expect the stock price to fall. Don't be a bigot against trading one directly over the other, they're both the same. And no, no insider trading at all, it's always stealing; you can't come up with a way to justify stealing. It's not ok to steal from investors to make up for being treated unfairly by your company.

gnaritas 9y ago

> The message sent by making insider trading a crime could be heard that way : we're making money with your work that we don't really care about because we won't own stock from your company a year from now, we're deteriorating your work environment, and we'll punish you if you try to join the party. I really don't think you understand the purpose of markets. If you did you wouldn't be having thoughts like this.

oelmekki 9y ago
Well, if you refuse to try to understand other points of view, that's your choice. Beware, though : in coming decade, you may find that the whole world "doesn't understand" and acts accordingly. Happy trading.
- gnaritas 9y ago
  The whole world is going to do what's it's always done, remain a mess of disagreement and be dominated by the rich and serve the interests of the rich.
  - oelmekki 9y ago
    I don't see why rich people are in this discussion. Certainly, should there be a collapse of classic finance, they would move away and just be as rich. This is hardly relevant anyway, because it's not rich people who drive classic finance, it's banks. And banks are major actors because ... they have all the money of the world at their disposal. Should people be angry at banks and move their money from them (let's see... what recent financial innovation could allow people to withdraw their money from banks?), banks would be powerless. By the way, your overconfidence is typical of end of 3rd wave.