3 ms·
It's mostly about how skimming a tiny bit of cash off of every trade is perfectly good for the exchanges to do to john Q public, but heaven help us if real trad
by Pxtl 9y ago
It's mostly about how skimming a tiny bit of cash off of every trade is perfectly good for the exchanges to do to john Q public, but heaven help us if real traders have to put up with that.
I have no idea if Sanders' plan was good or not, I'm more grousing about how critically important principles of how the market is supposed to work seem to vary depending on whether you're talking about consumer-level investments vs. institutional investors.
- jstanley 9y agoI still don't get what you're trying to say. Who is "skimming a tiny bit of cash off of every trade"? Do you buy into the notion that HFT is somehow so fast that it can travel back in time and jump ahead of orders that have just executed?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- JetSpiegel 9y agoWhy is it OK for the exchange to charge fees from every trade motivated by profit, but if the government does it to redistribute, it is somehow labelled as "market distortions"? Either fees on every trade distort the market, and in that case the exchange is distorting the market, or they don't have appreciable effects and the government can levy that tax. My opinion is that this a political opinion, and pretending that this is an economic concern is just a smokescreen.
- jstanley 9y agoThe exchange owns the exchange, and provides the service of running the exchange, and can set whatever fees they like, and people are free to use other exchanges that set different fees. The government already takes (more than) its fair share, from existing taxes. It has no right to also levy a tax on every trade on every exchange.