5 ms·

This feels like a great time to mention that insider trading is perfectly legal for Congress and is insanely profitable for them.

koheripbal 6y ago
Insider Trading is legally defined as registered company insiders trading or selling insider information for profit. It makes no sense to say that a congressman is "insider trading" because they are given a report on the outbreak of disease in China. There is no such thing as "insider trading" for geopolitical or macroeconomic events.
- ALittleLight 6y ago
  If you think about "insider trading" in the sense of trading on "material non-public information" then it makes sense to say that congresspeople are legally insider trading. If I hear from a friend at X that company X is about to Y and trade off that, that's insider trading. Right? If a congressman heard in closed testimony that a bad thing is about to happen to X and trades off that...
  - Consultant32452 6y ago
    Congress gets a lot of info first. For example, some got caught making trades after they got briefed on covid, before the info was public. They know who's about to win big contacts in their district. They know who is about to be affected be legislation that was snuck into the budget last minute without debate.
    - koheripbal 6y ago
      A lot of people know about a lot of things before the "public" knows. That doesn't make it "insider trading". It is a very specific legal term that deals with the internal information of public corporations - eg: their quarterly sales revenues. It doesn't make sense out of that context. Also, there were TONS of people talking about the outbreak in China when those Congresspeople sold shares. I sold at the same time. The information was out there - it's just that the Western MSM wasn't covering it.
      - Consultant32452 6y ago
        The people talking about the outbreak didn't get classified briefings.
  - koheripbal 6y ago
    Obviously if you redefine the term, you can make it whatever you want. ...but in legal-reality it has a specific meaning that doesn't cover what you're referring to. Also, the notion that Congress found out about COVID-19 before everyone else is ludicrous. People who took the time to read the reports out of China sold WELL BEFORE even congress sold. I know - I was one of them. The problem is that MSM did NOT cover the outbreak in China. Many accused those who did of racism and posts on social media were squashed from brigades more concerned with "fear-mongering".
    - nerdponx 6y ago
      The story about Congress trading on Covid news (and briefings?) is not that they traded, it's that they traded and didn't do much else except wait for 500k people to die.
    - ALittleLight 6y ago
      I don't think I'm redefining the term. "Insider trading involves trading in a public company's stock by someone who has non-public, material information about that stock for any reason. Insider trading can be either illegal or legal depending on when the insider makes the trade. It is illegal when the material information is still non-public, and this sort of insider trading comes with harsh consequences." https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/insidertrading.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/insidertrading.asp
      - koheripbal 6y ago
        "about that stock" is not phrased well in that entry. It makes it sound like any information that isn't public that might impact that stock is legally "insider trading". That is not correct. It has to be non-public *company* information - not just ANY non-public information. If you discover a comet in outer space that is going to crash into McDonalds HQ. Shorting that stock does not make you an insider. That's why it's called INSIDER trading. Because it's all about the non-public information INSIDE the corporation in question.
        6y ago

koheripbal 6y ago

Insider Trading is legally defined as registered company insiders trading or selling insider information for profit. It makes no sense to say that a congressman is "insider trading" because they are given a report on the outbreak of disease in China. There is no such thing as "insider trading" for geopolitical or macroeconomic events.

ALittleLight 6y ago
If you think about "insider trading" in the sense of trading on "material non-public information" then it makes sense to say that congresspeople are legally insider trading. If I hear from a friend at X that company X is about to Y and trade off that, that's insider trading. Right? If a congressman heard in closed testimony that a bad thing is about to happen to X and trades off that...
- Consultant32452 6y ago
  Congress gets a lot of info first. For example, some got caught making trades after they got briefed on covid, before the info was public. They know who's about to win big contacts in their district. They know who is about to be affected be legislation that was snuck into the budget last minute without debate.
  - koheripbal 6y ago
    A lot of people know about a lot of things before the "public" knows. That doesn't make it "insider trading". It is a very specific legal term that deals with the internal information of public corporations - eg: their quarterly sales revenues. It doesn't make sense out of that context. Also, there were TONS of people talking about the outbreak in China when those Congresspeople sold shares. I sold at the same time. The information was out there - it's just that the Western MSM wasn't covering it.
    - Consultant32452 6y ago
      The people talking about the outbreak didn't get classified briefings.
- koheripbal 6y ago
  Obviously if you redefine the term, you can make it whatever you want. ...but in legal-reality it has a specific meaning that doesn't cover what you're referring to. Also, the notion that Congress found out about COVID-19 before everyone else is ludicrous. People who took the time to read the reports out of China sold WELL BEFORE even congress sold. I know - I was one of them. The problem is that MSM did NOT cover the outbreak in China. Many accused those who did of racism and posts on social media were squashed from brigades more concerned with "fear-mongering".
  - nerdponx 6y ago
    The story about Congress trading on Covid news (and briefings?) is not that they traded, it's that they traded and didn't do much else except wait for 500k people to die.
  - ALittleLight 6y ago
    I don't think I'm redefining the term. "Insider trading involves trading in a public company's stock by someone who has non-public, material information about that stock for any reason. Insider trading can be either illegal or legal depending on when the insider makes the trade. It is illegal when the material information is still non-public, and this sort of insider trading comes with harsh consequences." https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/insidertrading.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/i/insidertrading.asp
    - koheripbal 6y ago
      "about that stock" is not phrased well in that entry. It makes it sound like any information that isn't public that might impact that stock is legally "insider trading". That is not correct. It has to be non-public *company* information - not just ANY non-public information. If you discover a comet in outer space that is going to crash into McDonalds HQ. Shorting that stock does not make you an insider. That's why it's called INSIDER trading. Because it's all about the non-public information INSIDE the corporation in question.
      - 6y ago