deObfuscate

3 ms·

1.
by deObfuscate 5y ago
I don't have an argument. You don't need to argue to contribute. My contribution was pointing out persuasive writing devices often used to add credibility to one’s argument but are not supported by any logic or reasoning in his
2.
by deObfuscate 5y ago
Economists aren't a monolith. Legalizing insider trading does nothing for fairness. The SEC does catch insider trading. And yes, they could do better. Your morals are showing. Just because you can justify it doesn't make it so for
3.
by deObfuscate 5y ago
Good enforcement isnt impossible. Improbable, yes. Every trade has to be disclosed. There isn't a block-chain involved, but their is an e-paper trail. We are on a technology forum in a time where ten people could probably put together
4.
by deObfuscate 5y ago
Personally, I think the argument is interesting. Let us split it into technical and cultural concerns. A market changes according to flow and distribution of public and private information. The more publoc information, the more accurately p
5.
by deObfuscate 5y ago
Their obviously wasn't much thought put in to this. Anywhere that a conflict of interest occurs has potential for abuse. If the officer/employee/agent has the ability to influence the result and profit then their is a conflic
6.
by deObfuscate 5y ago
So, if I were a trader at Enron who made good money trading electricity and gas then used that money to short the stock based on private information, I'd be doing everyone a service and fighting for fairness. Better yet, I could be one