No one can actually articulate who is the victim in the "crime" of insider trading
>>539479689Everyone who didnt make the trade.The stock market is a form of usury and should be banned btw.
>>539479689The victim is everyone else that isnt participating in it.
>>539479884Fpbp
>>539479884>Everyone who didnt make the trade. True.>The stock market is a form of usury and should be banned btw.Stock market is a bankster and mafia run casino. The people who banksters and mafia want win, everybody else loses. If you are large enough , like boomer pension fund, you can somewhat negate all the naked short selling that is going on , for instance.
>>539479689Insider trading is good actually, for the market. It should be legal as long as the bet is based on a true belief of where the stock is going to go, rather than trying to manipulate it to go somewhere. For lawmakers/potus/judiciary, this temptation is too strong since it is very easy for them to justify moving things around to make themselves money... so for them trading should be banned
>>539479689The person with inside knowledge is buying/selling the stock at a price that they know is not an accurate reflection of the value of the company due to information that the public doesn't have access to. This compromises the integrity of the market and undermines faith of investors in that integrity.
>>539480564The market's integrity is exactly its ability to accurately represent the true value of the company. If an insider knows the market is wrong, he would CORRECT the market by making a big bet in that direction
>>539479689the moral fiber of society
>>539479689the natural state of capitalism is just a massive scam economy.laws are required to have it function somewhat fairly.
>>539480641If you are a government official and know that Raytheon go up because it is about to get a 6 gorillion dollar contract to blow up kids in the middle east because you are the one giving them that contract, you are essentially scamming whoever you are buying that stock from. Likewise, if you are about to do something that harms a company, and sell all of your shares to unwitting investors just before you do it, you are scamming them.
>>539480898>If you are a government official and know that Raytheon go up because it is about to get a 6 gorillion dollar contract to blow up kids in the middle east because you are the one giving them that contract, you are essentially scamming whoever you are buying that stock from.This is a communist definition of scamming. The point in that case is that the market is representing the wrong value, so it is the market who is scamming everyone. The way to correct it is to buy a big call on the stock and force the market to move in the correct direction to represent the true value. I still don't think legislators should be able to do any trades at all because there is just too much temptation for them to actually manipulate the values using their power over society
>>539479689The victim is those who trade after the information is utilized, which leads to measurably quantifiable comparative loss.The idea is in essence that the economic pie is fixed; one’s gain is the loss of another. There is no real extra injection in terms of extraction rates when it comes to commodities, reducing most traded products to commodities is something the market is very good at.If one person wins and another loses upon the basis of their social relation to hidden information, then regulators view that as cheating in the economic game.(they acquired a share of the pie unfairly from another using hidden information.)
>>539479884>Everyone who didnt make the trade.How so?>>539480260>everyone else that isnt participating in it.How so?
>>539480564>This compromises the integrity of the marketNon sequitur.
>>539480646How so?
>>539480795The natural state of socialism is mass murder.
>>539480898>you are essentially scamming whoever you are buying that stock fromHow so?
>>539481405So the victim would be everyone who engaged in trading said commodity without the hidden information that was used as leverage by another trader to create an outsized advantage for themselves. The market bears the collective burden of insider trading. It can be considered a crime against the commons, I suppose.It doesn’t really matter anymore though, we have accepted as a civilization that these are not things that matter to us all that much.
>>539479689Public investors without privy to the insider information. A publicly traded company is asking me to purchase a share of their company. If people inside the company plan on insider trading that hurts the value of my share. Why should I invest in a company that wants to intentionally lose me money?
>>539481405>The victim is those who trade after the information is utilized, which leads to measurably quantifiable comparative loss.How so?>The idea is in essence that the economic pie is fixedFixed pie fallacy.>If one person wins and another loses upon the basis of their social relation to hidden informationThat's virtually every trade.Your pseudo-reasoning is retarded.
>>539479884Basically this. At a minimum there should be a minimum holding time. "Investment" is basically dead in favor of speculation and market manipulation.
>>539481644>the victim would be everyone who engaged in trading said commodity without the hidden informationHow are they a victim? Is the loser of every trade a "victim", by your retarded definition?
>>539479689https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kbkysPTnHcSocial media has primed an environment where this type of degeneracy is not only accepted, it thrives. Social media desensitizes and radicalizes even moderates into believing heinous and abhorrent behavior is acceptable under the correct context. Spend just 5 minutes on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, you will find hordes of these deranged people. They exist among us. The FBI knows about them but never acts until it is far too late. Western society is on a one-way fast track to collapse as long as social media continues to destroy minds and decay the culture.
>>539481652>Public investors without privy to the insider informationHow so?>insider trading that hurts the value of my shareThat would be a violation of fiduciary duty to shareholders.Nothing to do with insider trading.Next.
>>539479884fpbp, the free market is an academic abstraction and it doesn't and cannot exist, gas the kikes
>>539481467From a neoliberal trickle down perspective there is no argument against insider trading, because apparently the prosperity will trickle down anyway.In reality the root of the problem is that money is a competitive resource. Your money must compete with the money of others to buy goods and services, so if somebody is gaining money through insider trading they will have a comparative advantage and be able to outcompete. Them out competing you may be seen in things like rising stock or house prices.Of course, if insider trading is bad for that reason, then so is inherited wealth. But oligarchs have made it their mission to keep you from asking that question.
>>539479689anyone who has to look at the price and make a decisiondamaging the method of price discovery should be punishable by death
>>539481743>Basically this.You're retarded.>speculationSpeculation is good. It drives provides liquidity and drives price discovery and thus allocation of resources to their most productive uses.
>>539481405Zero sum game=insider trading erodes confidence in the market due to outsized wins by those that “cheat”, integrity of the commons is eroded, less people trade.
>>539481900With insider trading allowed, the public market price will be MORE accurate, not less
occupy wall street.
resources are limited, under capitalism im okay with people getting more of those resources if they risked/worked for it. insider trading is cheating that system
>>539481847Then why do you rail against it?
>>539481689If you are too stupid to figure out how trading insider information leads to public investor loss when leveraged appropriately, which erodes investor confidence in common trade, then you have no business in this conversation.
>>539481885Wrong. Insider trading is good because it accelerates the correction of prices to reflect their true fundamental value.
>>539481900>anyone who has to look at the price and make a decisionHow so?>damaging the method of price discoveryThat's the opposite of what insider trading does.
>>539481953>insider trading erodes confidence in the market due to outsized wins by those that [know more]Non sequitur.You're just a stupid parrot parroting a thesis you don't understand.
>>539482016>insider trading is cheating that systemHow so?
>>539482074>you're stupid!Not an argument.Go ahead and make your argument, instead of just claiming you have one.
>>539479689It is an unfair advantage, it harms other investors who don't have the same advantage, and perhaps it causes movement that wouldn't naturally happen otherwise, so it distorts things. It could and would lead to a lot of manipulation and abuse of the marketplace. Also, it can encourage those like politicians to abuse their positions or it could affect their votes on policies.
>>539481935With sufficient insider information speculation is not required.You are in essence arguing that one person should be forced to speculate to engage in trade while the other is not speculating.I have a coin with two of the same face, you have not seen the coin. Would you like to bet on the outcome of the flip? I’m also betting on the outcome of the flip, but you cannot see my bet, since it is hidden in the noise of speculators. I already know the outcome of the coin because I’ve seen it. Oh, and I’ve spent quite a sum of money hiring pundits to convince everyone to speculate on the coin outcome that provides me with the most profit(naturally, they’ll be investing on the wrong side of the coin.)A few people might get lucky, but my outcome is guaranteed.Hope you now understand.
>>539481835If an insider sells his share the value of mine goes down. That is a violation of the fiduciary duty.
>>539482423>It is an unfair advantageHow so? Is any market research an "unfair advantage"?>it harms other investors who don't have the same advantageHow so? Does any market research "harm other investors"?>it causes movement that wouldn't naturally happen otherwiseCorrect. It moves the price closer to the fundamental value.>so it distorts things.It does the opposite. It eliminates distortions.
>>539479689There is the obvious victims. The guys who sold stock to insider who knew it was going to go up, or those that bought it from insiders who knew it would go down.There are the market makers, who are trading and losign against insiders.None of this is the reason insider trading is so scary for wall street. The real victim is the stock market itself. Stocks are a ponzi scheme, and if you let insider trading happen this will be exposed
>>539482262Oh wow, you made the same argument repeatedly by calling others “retarded”.You cannot have it both ways. Long story short, you are a disingenuous cunt who has no place in trade. Many people already showed a multitude of reasons why it is judged as a bad thing.The public sentiment is that it -is- a bad thing to do, with a multitude of reasons outlined.Your hemming and hawwing about logical fallacies does not change the reality of public sentiment.You’re just looking for someone to give you permission to insider trade.Good, go for it. You’ll never get a series 7.>LOL WHY IS INSIDER TRADING BAD THO!What you should really be asking is “what is the volume of insider trading that the market can tolerate being extracted without detection.)
>>539482733>You are in essence arguing that one person should be forced to speculateNon sequitur.Are you a bot? Why are you making all these stupid leaps in logic?
>>539479689>insider trading is based now that zion donny does out in the open just like pedophiliaWhy are miggers like this?
>>539483045>Oh wow, you made the same argument repeatedly by calling others “retarded”.No I didn't, you lying little rat.
>>539483012If I have access to the right insider information I can distort the signal to create an outside advantage of myself. Arbitrage opportunity comes from value distorted away from fundamental value. If the fundamental value is N and I pay/convince a bunch of people to say it is Y while knowing the fundamental value is X, while the market trends towards fundamental value over time as information density grows…welll, I’ve just extracted a significant sum from the speculative value versus the fundamental value, since I have convinced people to trade at the speculative value.
>>539483021>The guys who sold stock to insider who knew it was going to go up, or those that bought it from insiders who knew it would go down.How are they victims?If I do better market research than you, and trade with you, are you a "victim"?Typical commie pussy, always trying to make himself a "victim".
>>539483256>distort the signalWrong. You'd be moving the price closer to its fundamental value.
>>539482187>>539481935>>539481761>>539481689>>539483217Oh really? It looks like you are the lying shit faced rat fuck.
>>539479884>Everyone who didnt make the trade.It's basically sour grapes, then.
>>539483407Wow, you really are a fucking retard.Making an argument and *also* calling someone retarded on the side doesn't mean "you're retarded" IS the argument, you stupid little rat.
>>539483286>If I do better market research than you, and trade with you, are you a "victim"?In insider trading you are not doing "better" market research, you have information that I have no way of getting. Yes, buying or selling to insider trading makes you a victim. More importantly the moment individual investors realize that they are trading against insider traders the entire stock market will implode.
>>539483323WRONG! the distorted speculated value is not the fundamental value.
>>539482762And if he buys?
>>539483547The value based on better information (the insider's) is closer to the fundamental value.
>>539483465Wow, you are really a fucking retard. You can’t even understand basic concepts, simply being disingenuous and dishonest.What else to expect from a shit faced rat fuck?
>>539479689The bagholder. There are 2 sides to every trade. /thread
>>539483504>In insider trading you are not doing "better" market researchYes you are. You in essence have very GOOD market research.>but I don't have the same level of research waaaaahNot my problem. Git gud.
>>539483592WRONG.
>>539479689the options sellers
>>539483609>no rebuttalGlad I taught you the difference between an insult and an ad hominem, you stupid fuck.
>>539483644Nope.
>>539479689>No one can actually articulate who is the victim in the "crime" of insider tradingAre you retarded? The shareholders of a company who don't have advance notice that the stock is going to tank because they're not inside the boardroom.
>>539483676I accept your concession.
>>539481559Malding from a jeet leaf lol
>>539483641Only reason wall street exists is because they tell idiots putting in money that it is a fair playing field. No investor would ever put money into a stock that allowed constant insider trading information to leak.
Anyone who would otherwise have a steak in the equity markets or business operations.
>>539483837I made none, you dumb fuck. You did.You didn't even know the difference between an insult and an ad hom.
BUT GUYS WHY IS INSIDER TRADING WRONG!
>>539483862Nice deflection attempt, beaner.
>>539481559>kills 50 million plus >ranked numbah 10K
>>539483954I accept your concession, you don’t have to suck my fat cock bro.
Does OP really think his best means of getting away with insider trading is by starting a grassroots anonymous movement on 4chan and overthrowing the entire stock market regulatory system, and his best means to convince us to do so is by using reddit style arguments to browbeat us into offering help?
>>539480641This is some fucking advanced Jewjitsu
>>539483868>Only reason wall street exists isto help companies raise capital to grow, provide liquidity for investors, enable real-time asset pricing, manage financial risk, and facilitate wealth creation by allocating capital to its most productive uses
>>539483970Why indeed?It isn't. You want more flow of accurate information into markets, not less.
Insider trading enables infinite money glitches because coordination at the top is rock solid. The entire stock market should be abolished or stock valuations should be taxed
>>539479689just kill all the investment bankers
>>539484031If he shares his insider information here it becomes (limited) public knowledge
>>539484007Try losing weight and maybe your brain will actually work, fatass.
>>539484059How am I supposed to manage financial risk against secrets?
>>539484127He'd have more financial success sharing pics of his butthole with the troons on /b/
>>539484050It's just common sense.Insider knows more -> insider trades -> price reflects more information.
>>539480520the rothschilds should of been executed for building an intelligence apparatus and using it to capture all the money instead of using it to defeat napoleon
>>539484136Stop sucking my cock PLEASE anon, I did not ask and it feels so GAY.
>>539484145Same way you manage risk for all things you don't know about, including the future.
>>539481652right, without laws against insider trading no one would tithe to 419(k)'s
>>539484059to do any and all of these, they need to get idiots to put money in. If they don't pretend like insider trading is not going to happen nobody would put in a cent.
>>539484099>Insider trading enables infinite money glitchesYou're a fucking idiot.>The entire stock market should be abolishedYou're a fucking idiot. See >>539484059.It's really a tragedy that retards like you are allowed to vote.
>>539483286>If I do better market research than youEven the best in the world suck at it kiddo
>>539484190i want to buy shares in nuking nyc
>>539484113No. Kill all the socialists.
>>539484217Of course you're also a homosexual, to boot.
>>539484398lets compromise and only go after kidfuckers first
>>539484326>to do any and all of these, they need to get idiots to put money in.Wrong.You just don't know what you're talking about.This is why an economic literacy test should be required to vote.
>>539483991Post skin saar
>>539484444I didn’t ask you to suck my cock, but here you are doing all this cocksucking.What else to expect from a shitfaced rat fuck?
>>539484524Post skin, beaner.
>>539479689JPOW
>>539484618Well I asked first
>>539479689The taxpayers who are paying these politicians salaries which they use to defraud the market
>>539484486You’re an economic illiterate, as you cannot figure out how to use insider information.You still somehow think that it allows the market to fundamental value rather than distorting it. If you cannot understand this simple concept, it is pointless to argue anything more.Did you flunk out of eco101?Do you even have a high school degree?
>>539484743So you should do first what you demand of others.
>>539484792>You’re an economic illiterateNo, YOU are.>distorting itHow does trading on MORE accurate information "distort" the price, you stupid fat fuck?
>>539484898>no uI accept your concession.
>>539479689it's real simple if you steal more than the actuarial value of a human life you should be executed.
>>539484839Well you demanded it too and that’s your belief so you do it first
>>539484898Insider trading — meaning trading a company’s securities based on material, non‑public information — is illegal and prohibited in every major stock exchange worldwide. Global Overview• NYSE (New York Stock Exchange) Strictly illegal under U.S. SEC rules.• NASDAQ Same U.S. laws apply.• LSE (London Stock Exchange) Criminal offense under UK’s Financial Services and Markets Act.• TSE (Tokyo Stock Exchange) Illegal under Japan’s Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.• HKEX (Hong Kong Exchange) Prohibited under Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Ordinance.• SSE (Shanghai Stock Exchange) Illegal under Chinese securities law.• NSE (National Stock Exchange of India) Criminal offense under India’s SEBI Act. Why It’s Universally Banned• Fairness: Ensures all investors have equal access to information.• Market integrity: Prevents manipulation and loss of trust.• Legal enforcement: Regulators (SEC, FCA, SEBI, etc.) impose fines, bans, and prison sentences.There are no major exchanges where insider trading is “legal and accepted.” In fact, exchanges and regulators actively monitor for suspicious trades, often using advanced surveillance systems.All of these exchanges have collectively decided that you are wrong.There is no major stock exchange that allows insider trades. Where did you learn to trade, Sudanese Institute of Finance?
>>539485083You demanded it first, so you should do it first.
>>539485136>making ChatGPT argue for youLOL!Try using your brain, fatty.
>>539484898Look, I understand a simple Sudanese trader cannot possibly understand the market dynamics of the first world. Perhaps you should go back to the kiddie pool?
>>539485217LOL! It’s public information. Or are you saying it’s unfair of me to use an application I have access to that you must not, and therefore I am committing some sort of moral offense that provides an outsized advantage?
>>539485178No it’s you who stated that you believe a demand imposed on another is one imposed on the self not I so you should impose the belief you wish to impose on me upon yourself and post your skin first
>>539485242>>539485136Since the illiterate fatty who uses ChatGPT to argue for him insists on an ad hominem:Milton Friedman, laureate of the Nobel Prize in Economics, said>You want more insider trading, not less. You want to give the people most likely to have knowledge about deficiencies of the company an incentive to make the public aware of that.Are you now claiming that Milton Friedman was a "Sudanese trader", "flunked out of econ 101", and "didn't have a high school degree"?
>>539481559The picture clearly says communism, not socialism.
>>539485330Just admit you couldn't find an argument and had to enlist ChatGPT, fatty.Do you want me to enlist ChatGPT as well?
>>539485217Oh, I get it. It is unfair of me to use this information, isn’t it, my sweet simple Sudanese boy.It just provides me too much of an advantage.
>>539485347No, it's you who demanded it first, and thus should do it first.
>>539485447When did he say that? I’m sorry, I don’t recall, can you provide a source?
>>539485552I already debunked you, fatty.
>>539485548The fact that I had to show this to you demonstrates the degree of your own ignorance.FACT: Every major stock exchange prosecutes insider trading.It doesn’t matter what your Nobel laureate said, the fact of the matter is that markets around the world have decided he was wrong, and that market integrity is more important. I didn’t realize the Nobel committee operated a major stock exchange?Where is it?I can’t seem to find it anywhere…Oh that’s right, it doesn’t fucking exist.
>>539485447>Friedman was born in Brooklyn, New York City, on July 31, 1912. His parents, Sára Ethel (née Landau) and Jenő Saul Friedman, were Jewish
>>539485770>It doesn’t matter what your Nobel laureate saidIt does because you tried to make an ad hominem.
>>539485696Listen, I understand that you are simply tired of getting anally raped with facts and logic.You can always go to a different forum. Perhaps Reddit is more your speed?
>>539485623I accept your concession.https://www.wsj.com/articles/information-is-not-a-crime-1428876543
>>539485920Oh no, are you upset about someone breaking rhetorical rules because it’s UNFAIR?Fuck it’s kind of like insider trading.I sure am despicable!
>>539485770>FACT: Every major stock exchange prosecutes insider trading.WRONG, you lying fatass. Since you insist on using AI to argue for you:>True or false: Every major stock exchange prosecutes insider trading.>False.>Here is why:>Exchanges lack criminal authority: Stock exchanges (like the NYSE or Nasdaq) are self-regulatory organizations (SROs) or private corporations, not criminal courts. They can monitor trading, fine members, suspend licenses, or delist companies, but they cannot criminally prosecute individuals or entities. >Government entities handle prosecution: Criminal prosecution of insider trading is carried out by government entities—such as national law enforcement agencies, state prosecutors, or justice departments (e.g., the U.S. Department of Justice). >Civil vs. Criminal Enforcement: Regulatory agencies (like the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or the UK Financial Conduct Authority) bring civil or administrative charges, while criminal courts handle criminal cases. >Not all countries outlaw or enforce it uniformly: Beyond authority structure, not every country or regulatory jurisdiction aggressively prosecutes insider trading— enforcement varies significantly around the world.
>>539485964Hah this dipshit actually fucking sourced it.Bro I am fucking laughing oh my god he actually did.How humiliating.
>>539485931Again with your delusions and homosexual fantasies.Try getting the excess lard out of your brain.
>>539485577You’re demanding a belief you hold onto me where as I only made a demand you are the one with a belief of a first demand of another requiring a demand of oneself yet you do not live or act upon this belief clearly as you keep deflecting and not just posting your white aryan skin but instead keep demanding that I demand myself but refuse to demand yourself
>>539486046>demand a source>hah he sourced itThis is the lard making you retarded.
>>539479884investing in future should be still legal. investing just to cash out should be regulated.
>>539486116Nope. You demanded it first, so you should do it first.
>>539479689What do you mean? All the people who weren't on the inside are victims of it. All the people who also then suffer from the further actions of the morally unsound that partake of it.
>>539485998Oh my… he had to use GPT to get fake support for what everyone naturally recognizes as flaccid semantics.EVERY COUNTRY THAT HOSTS A MAJOR STOCK EXCHANGE PROSECUTES INSIDER TRADING.Go back to Sudan.
>>539486177>All the people who weren't on the inside are victims of it.Wrong.>All the people who also then suffer from the further actions of the morally unsound that partake of it.Wrong. They benefit from it. Because the price is now more accurate.
>>539486200>he had to use GPTAre you talking about yourself, fatass?>EVERY COUNTRY THAT HOSTS A MAJOR STOCK EXCHANGE PROSECUTES INSIDER TRADING.That's WRONG, you stupid fatass. Learn to read.
>>539479689Those transacting the stock?You know, the people whose money is getting taken? The *entire* reason to insider trade in the first place?Maybe if corporations were more open there wouldn't be any such thing as insider trading. But they're not.
>>539486140lmao bro don’t you know that CX requires TWO sources?It’s like you don’t even know basics.Here on /pol/ we take our arguments seriously, you need at least two sources.
>>539486231its sort of compelling reasoning i am coming around to it
>>539486173You are a hollow husk of a human and most likely brown if you we’re not brown it would have been as simple as posting your skin to stop this entirely but instead you deflect and impose your own convenient beliefs upon others to hide the fact you’re brown
>>539486337>moving the goalpostsJust shut up and kill yourself, fatass.
>>539479689
>>539486173>>539486140>>539486094>>539485998>>539485964I don't understand.Are you actually trying to reach a consensus or understanding of a topic, or are you trying to win meaningless stupid high school debate club style internet arguments for no productive reason whatsoever?
>>539486373>you're brownNo, you are.
>>539486231>You lost money because I used secret information to scam you into buying stocks only I knew were going to go down>You should be happy tho you benefitted because now its closer to its true value :)
>>539486373Fucking Sudanese boy thinks he understands first world economics I guess.
>>539485136A robust school of economic thought—championed by prominent economists like Milton Friedman and Henry Manne—argues that criminalizing insider trading actually harms the market.The persuasive case for legalizing insider trading rests on the principles of market efficiency, accurate pricing, and the practical realities of regulatory enforcement. Here is the economic argument for allowing insiders to trade on their knowledge.1. Faster, More Accurate Price DiscoveryThe primary function of a stock market is to accurately price assets based on all available information. When information is restricted, the market operates inefficiently because the stock price reflects an illusion rather than reality.If insiders are allowed to trade on non-public information, their buying or selling pressure moves the stock price toward its "true" value before the official announcement. For positive news: The price gradually rises, signaling to the broader market that the company's prospects are improving. For negative news: The price gradually falls, alerting the market that the company is struggling.By keeping insider trading illegal, regulators are essentially forcing the market to trade on outdated, inaccurate information until a scheduled press release.
>>539479689everyone deprived from the joy of watching insider traders get brutally tortured and murdered
>>5394851362. Smoothing Market VolatilityWhen insider trading is strictly prohibited, stock prices often experience violent, sudden shocks. A company might appear perfectly healthy until a surprise earnings miss causes the stock to gap down 20% in a single minute.If insiders were permitted to trade, the price adjustment would happen smoothly over time. A gradual decline is much less damaging to market stability than a sudden collapse. Furthermore, this gradual adjustment protects everyday investors: if bad news is priced in earlier through insider selling, fewer retail investors will unknowingly buy into a stock at an artificially inflated peak just days before the crash.3. The "Victimless Crime" RealityThe most common moral argument against insider trading is that it is "unfair" to the person on the other side of the trade. However, economically speaking, it is largely a victimless crime.Stock market transactions are anonymous and voluntary. If an insider buys 1,000 shares of a company because they know a lucrative merger is about to be announced, they are buying those shares from a willing seller. That seller had already decided to sell their shares at the current market price.The seller is not harmed by the insider; they simply missed out on future gains they were already willing to forfeit. In fact, the insider's buying pressure slightly raises the stock price, meaning the seller actually gets a fractionally better price than they would have if the insider had stayed out of the market.
>>539486420Nuh uh you are
>>5394851364. Misallocation of Enforcement ResourcesThe legal definition of insider trading is notoriously blurry. Regulators and courts spend millions of dollars and thousands of hours debating who constitutes an "insider," what qualifies as "material non-public information," and how far down the chain of "tippees" liability extends.This creates a sprawling, expensive enforcement apparatus focused on an activity that ultimately drives stock prices to their correct valuations. If insider trading were legalized, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Department of Justice could redirect those massive resources toward prosecuting destructive, unambiguous crimes that actually destroy shareholder value—such as accounting fraud, embezzlement, and market manipulation (e.g., pump-and-dump schemes).5. Aligning Executive IncentivesWhen executives are allowed to profit from the positive information they create, it serves as a powerful incentive for innovation and efficiency. If a CEO knows that successfully developing a breakthrough product will allow them to legally buy shares before the public announcement, their interests are deeply aligned with the long-term success of the company. It acts as a highly efficient, self-funding performance bonus that doesn't cost the company's treasury a dime.The Bottom Line: Banning insider trading prioritizes the appearance of fairness over actual market efficiency. By legalizing it, markets would become more accurate, volatility would decrease, and regulatory bodies could focus on catching corporate criminals who actually steal from investors, rather than punishing those who simply trade on accurate information.
>>539486444The fatass brownoid that (You) are doesn't understand economics at all.
>>539479689The person left holding the bag.
>>539486429>scam youNon sequitur.By your retarded logic, all trade should be banned.
>>539486507No, you are.
>>539486463“Hey GPT, does Milton Friedman run a major stock exchange?”“Fuck no nigga, he don’t.”No — Milton Friedman never operated a stock exchange. He was an economist, not a market operator.Stock exchanges — like the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), NASDAQ, or Tokyo Stock Exchange — are institutions that provide platforms for buying and selling securities. They are run by corporate entities or government-chartered organizations, not by individual economists.
>>539486484This but socialists.
>>539486631>does Milton Friedman run a major stock exchangeSo?Try constructing an actual argument, fatty.
>>539485447>Milton Friedman, laureate of the Nobel Prize in Economics, said>>You want more insider trading, not less. You want to give the people most likely to have knowledge about deficiencies of the company an incentive to make the public aware of that.>Are you now claiming that Milton Friedman was a "Sudanese trader", "flunked out of econ 101", and "didn't have a high school degree"?burn down the universities and flog the professors for tolerating the evil farce of economics
>>539486631Oh fuck nigga he didn’t run a major stock exchange? Wow, and he would be PROSECUTED if evidence was found of INSIDER TRADING?Wow that’s so weird, it’s almost like every single government that operates a major exchange doesn’t care about any of the bullshit that you just wrote.
>>539486576>Canada flag>Pro scammingSaar?
>>539486155investors should lose everything and die
>>539486728This but for Marxism.
>>539486699Many more people than a single economist collectively decided a long time ago that insider trading is against the interests of the market. If no major market allows it, then the market has decided that it not in the interest of the market. CASE CLOSED, GLAD I COULD HELP.BETTER LUCK NEXT TIME.
>>539486731>government says this so it's trueTo be clear, is this your argument?
>>539486744I already asked him to post skin so I say we all do so since he’s do avoidant
>>539486731It's because the governments understand that if insider trading is illegal, then only they who are above the law can take advantage of the information. It is a secret form of taxation
>>539486744>UK flag>is retardedSaar?
>>539486876I already asked you to post your skin, but you're so avoidant.
>>539479689Investment is socially acceptable gambling, and gambling comes with the implication of fair odds. No one knows if the stock will go up or down, or if the coin lands heads or tails. If you use a rigged coin, you are committing theft through falsified odds. Inside trading us weighting the coin
>>539486902>No youLmaoAre you 5?
>>539486331>the people whose money is getting taken?So every trade is a crime?
>>539486410Back at you and your friend.
>>539486927I asked first and you avoided first
>>539486744lol get this, not even INDIA legally allows insider trading.He would have had to get his education from GIBSMEDAT university somewhere in Sudan
>>539486963Are you trading these things with the secret knowledge that the person you sell it to will be disadvantaged/harmed by it?
>>539486774This but for socialists.
>>539487046>not even INDIA legally allows insider tradingKek he's somehow worse than a jeet then.
>>539479689The stock market is a complex mechanism to transfer wealth from one person to the other. Insider trading cheats that, thus steals from the one without the knowledge who bought or sold.
>>539486852>Many more people than a single economistargue that insider trading should be legal.
>>539487010>I asked first So you should do it first.
>>539486872If it was as ADVANTAGEOUS as you say, then why doesn’t any serious market allow it?How could ALL THE MAJOR EXCHANGES IN THE WORLD come to the same conclusion? (That insider trading should be punished)Idk maybe they are all WRONG eh?Or perhaps someone is seeking permission for bad behaviour.
>>539486940>Inside trading us weighting the coinNonsense. It's simply knowing better what the odds are.
>>539487183That’s your belief and we’ve been over this now stop avoiding
>>539486953>argument: y-you're a scammer!!1LmaoAre you 5?
>>539487046>>539487129>appeal to Indian policySo this is what the retarded fatass duo have stooped to. Lmao.
>>539487153Oh really? Does any serious market listen?
>>539487263>That’s your belief And what you said is your belief and we’ve been over this now stop avoiding
>>539479689It's MLM, who went first gets the biggest part of pie, but only if other morons follow and buy into fraud which is stock market. Then insider traders, so the ones who started MLM just rob people who they lied to to get their money into a scam.Stock Market in its principles is fraud where millions people own the company but they cannot run it, but few people at top run it for them (usually they do not even have >50% of stock, because their actions get more votes) and get all the gibs which they decide who will get.
>>539487359Yes. Especially private corporate debt markets and commodities and futures, real estate, art, etc.
>>539487129I hate to say it, but Canada is not bringing in the best people.
>>539487149>Insider trading cheatsIt doesn't.>stealsIt doesn't.Pray tell, what do you think is the purpose of a market? You said (incorrectly, but let's roll with it): >to transfer wealth from one person to the otherBut insider trading satisfies that broad and silly criterion. So what's your actual objection?
>>539487293>77 posts defending scamming.Try responding to this seriously >>539486429And this >>539487055
>>539487248>How could ALL THE MAJOR EXCHANGES IN THE WORLD come to the same conclusion? (That insider trading should be punished)They don't. You're just ignorant: >>539487492
>>539487590You can use it to cheat and you can use it to steal like anything else
>>539487571I hate to say it, but the US is not bringing in the best people.
>>539487593Try responding to this seriously >>539486576
>>539487492Oh man, he used GPT to find these markets which are not regulated securities!LETS DIVE INTO SEMANTICS FOR EACH ONE.
>>539487055>Are you trading these things with the secret knowledge that the person you sell it to will be disadvantaged/harmed by it?So if I think the price of an asset I'm selling to someone will decrease, all trade should be banned?Dumbfuck.
>>539479689The actual problem of insider trading is that it incentivizes people to run for positions of power in order to get access to non public information instead of running to improve the lives of the public. It also incentivizes politicians to pass laws based on if it will increase the price of the shares of the companies they are invested in instead of passing laws based on their impact on the public. The act itself of trading on non public information doesn't harm anybody
>>539487732It's neither cheating nor stealing.
“WAAAAAHHHH I WANT TO ENGAGE IN SECURITIES FRAUD WAAAAAah”“Why won’t the government let me engage in securities fraud!”
>>539487816>he used GPTAre you talking about yourself, fatass?
>>539479689The guy who the trade was with dumbass.>>539487153When you're selling, or purchasing a stock on information you're concealing from the public you're defrauding them. If I knew the factory was going to be shut down tomorrow, and I sold you a 100$ share I knew was about to be worth 0$, it's the same as selling you a PS5 box filled with rocks.
>>539487838>ThinkIs the same as>Have inside knowledge that the general public doesnt and know exactly whats going to happen.Try again
>>539487884Sorry bud, every major exchange host has decided you are wrong.
>>539487909Nice argument, fatty.
>>539487922>The guy who the trade was withNope.>When you're selling, or purchasing a stock on information you're concealing from the public you're defrauding them. Non sequitur.All sharps conceal their information from the public to retain their edge. Duh.Fucking idiot.
>>539479689Everyone in the US and most of the world is the victim except the person doing the insider trading.
>>539487963Wrong, and also not an argument.
>>539487934>>Have knowledge that the general public doesntThat's every sharp.
>>539488073>Everyone in the US and most of the world is the victimWrong.
>>539487884You are full of shit or never traded shitty company which was scammy.I actually had traded with one of that where board of directors knew they were bancrupt but made ESPI look like they are just ok, they talked really good abotu prospects, many people went in, even funds into company (this is why I stayed). Turned out they were absolutely broke, but they sold their actions at peak - completely legally because they did inform about it the same day. It is pure insider trading and fraud. Yet they were let free because they did it by the book. It is fraud, stealing and cheating.Or you have Ryan Reynolds, who buys stock of some alcohol maker, then goes to them and tells them he will volountarily for free be the face of their Ads. They start ads with Ryan, the stock goes up, he sells. It is pure fraud and using your dominant position on the market to influence it so the other people lose money - because on stock market it is zero sum game. Someone has to lose money for one to gain.
>>539479689All the retards who trade without proper information
>>539487468>and get all the gibsYou don't even know what a dividend is.Shut the fuck up, you fucking idiot.
>>539488161>You are full of shitNot an argument, dumbfuck.>they talked really good abotu prospectsThat's not what insider trading is, you stupid fuck.
>>539487262It’s like playing poker where the public can’t see the flop turn or river but the insider can it’s about market fairness for the public buying and selling publicly traded entities so that they can’t withhold or selectively disclose info that would affect the publics investments and decisions going forward so everyone can see the cards on the table and not get played by someone with the right friends>>539487407Now post skin and stop imposing your belief on me you slimy mongrel
>>539488301>It’s like [let me make up some stupid analogy]Shut up, you fucking retard. Every market and trade has information asymmetry. That's a fact of life.
>>539488161Hah, I shouldn’t tell you about the (company) that sold loans as another company shortly after its IPO under the licensed name of another company with some degree of obfuscation where it dumped a load of internal volume on its employees first, only for the stock to dive to around 1-4th its internal IPO.Ah fuck, it’s not (company), it’s (company) selling under the guise of (company) that is not actually(company)!Golden parachute.
>>539488266It literally is insider trading. Having knowledge you should share with shareholders but witholding it or lying to get yourself in better position is insider trading you fucking faggot jew.
>>539488301>post skinBack at you, beaner.>stop imposing your belief on meBack at you, beaner.>you slimy mongrelBack at you, beaner.
>>539488121Hypothetically If I have a car that I know is going to break down in 1000 miles and you have no way to tell, I then sell it to you, have I scammed you?
>>539488457It literally isn't, you stupid fucking mongrel.Lying about a company's finances isn't insider trading.Seriously kill yourself.
>>539479689>1postbythisIDa thread died for this
>>539488496Hypothetically If I have a stock that I know is going to decline and you have no way to tell, I then sell it to you, have I scammed you?
>>539488457You just don’t get it, insider trading makes a better market!
>>539488608Yes. It incorporates better information into the price.
>>539479689The free and fair market
>>539488597Yes. Because I have no way of knowing, its secret information.I notice you refused to answer the question, so I accept your concession.
>>539488538Having knowledge that other shareholders do not have to get into better position is insider trading, lying was just part of it you fucking jew. And this knowledge is usually kept by the CEOs and board of company which they tell to their friends to avoid being prosecuted which is insider trading.
>>539488660benefits from insider trading.Because the price now reflects better information.
>>539488686So every trade made by a superior trader is a "scam", according to your dumb ass. Correct?
>>539488496you just don’t get it, insider trading makes the market better. Thats why it’s legal in all major exchanges.Please don’t tell me you weren’t aware of this!
>>539488660There is no fair market with stock market when CEOs and biard of directors have all the knowledge and power to decide what company does stock holders have zero. It is all fraud and MLM. The value of action is completely unrelated to real earning of the company. This is why they can scam you with insider trading.
>>539488688>Having knowledge that other shareholders do not have to get into better position is insider tradingWrong. You can't even get your definition right. Get the fuck out of hear you donkey-brained piece of shit blathering retard.>lying was just part of it Wrong, stupid faggot. Lying is a separate act.
>>539479884Excellent post.
>>539488748>insider trading makes the market betterCorrect. It makes prices more accurate.
Here's a challenge for the unenlightened naysayers ITT:Name 1 (one) reason why insider trading should be prohibited that's not a communist egalitarian "muh equality" argument.
>>539488816>be told over and over again that insider trading is shit with examples>call people names as an argumentcant be more retarded than thatStock market is fraud and MLM bullshit.
>>539488784>stock holders have zeroWrong, retard.>It is all fraud and MLM.Don't use terms, you don't understand, you clown.
>>539488746>Still refuses to answer the car hypotheticalI already accepted your concession anon.No need to embarass yourself by calling scammers "superior traders"
>>539479884Terrible post.
>>539479689Everyone.
>>539488476>double response to the same post it must have pissed you off leaf jeet>>539488404>theres murder all the time anyway why should we try to stop it >>539488597If you don’t inform the buyer of the state of the stock then yes it’s a scam as you are withholding info to their detriment and for your own interests
>>539488926Lying isn't insider trading, you stupid redditor.
>>539488911If insider trading was legal you fucking midwit jew, then noone would trade on the stock market because the CEOs and board of directors would tell their families what they are going to do with company so they would take all the money out of it, because they have all the knowledge and power to run company in any direction they want. This would make stockk market completely stupid for any individual investors or even funds.So in a way I can agree that insider trading should be allowed, because stock market is fucking bullshit and should not exist in non jewed economies.
>>539488983>Refuses to answer the question.I accept your concession.Face it, you had nothing but a silly "muh everyone should be equal!" pseudo-argument.
>>539489047Nowhere says it isn't
>>539489025*No one.
>>539489039>>theres murder all the time anyway why should we try to stop it So we should "try to" stop all trades, according to you, right? Dumb fuck.
>>539488071No, anyone who is trading on insider information is engaged in securities fraud. If you know anyone who is doing this they've got several hotlines in both America, and Canada where they will actually pay you a great deal of money to report them.If you know anyone who is doing this, tell me here, and I will collect the reward for you pal. This shit is really easy to catch brokerages in both of our countries are all required by law (for this very reason) to collect a great deal of information. If you don't think there is anything wrong with selling someone something you know is worthless for a very high price, I've got a some pocket lint you can buy for your entire bank account.
>>539489039>If you don’t inform the buyer of the state of the stockAccording to EHpeCUVK, every stock trader must inform their counterparty of the "state of the stock".LMFAO!
>>539479689Insider trading is like insuring a building and then secretly have your friend burn it down to claim insurance.
>>539489058>If insider trading was legal you fucking midwit jew, then noone would trade on the stock marketTrivially false, because there are and have been markets where insider trading is allowed and people still trade.
Why does someone list a company to an exchange?To raise money.If the exchange is rigged, there is no reason to invest in a company, nor is there any reason for a company to bother listing.
>>539481467> Sit at poker table. (Stock market)> Everyone pitches ( but shares)> The dealer (company) and someone (player) is working together (insider trading information)> Rally the stock (player up ls the ante)> Dealer deals the rest of the deck (company pulls the rug and crashes the stock).>Player walks away and cashes out everyone else's money. You may ask why it turned into a poker match. My reply is that it isn't. It isn't poker because it's not even a game. A game has fair rules. You can even list rate percentages of winning. You weren't playing poker just like you weren't buying a stock.
>>539489211Again, me trading on information you lack isn't illegal. Nor should it be.You have no argument. You have nothing.
>>539489322yeah insiders, untill all the noninsiders are gone. though because of sheer numbers of people it can take time.You are just fucking retarded jew who probably never even traded.
>>539489291Not at all.
>>539489211Would you report insider trading or would you engage in it yourself?
>>539489112>Still hasnt answered it>is too stupid to see I actually did answer his question here >>539488983Again your concession is already accepted no need to keep barking pup.
>>539489379>yeah insidersWrong again.
>>539489341Trading isn't rigging.
>>539479689Trading is a zero sum game, for you to get money, someone else had to lose money. When you cheat, you're stealing money from someone else. There you go, kike retard.
>>539489424So hey do you think we should legalize insider trading?Some guy on 4chan’s /pol/ board thinks it might be more market efficient. I know it doesn’t make a lot of sense but… well, we could stand to gain a lot.Especially if we don’t announce the changes.What do you think anon?
>>539489377You having inside information that you obtained in some manner yourself that CEOs will publish in legal time (usually 24h) and trading on it is not inside trading. Unless you got it straight from the CEOs.Inside trading is specifically about people who run companies telling what they will do with company to their friends so they can buy or sell accordigly before information goes live.I think you are too stupid to understand what you are arguing about.
>>539489357>muh pokerA market isn't a poker game, you stupid fat fuck.
>>539489523>Some guy on 4chan’s /pol/ board thinks it might be more market efficient.Kek, well if someone on 4chan said it...
>>539489540He has to use analogies because he doesn’t think of you as an equal.
>>539489404this post just proves you have zero understanding of what insider trading is as I wrote here >>539489529
>>539489424You didn't answer the question. Your damaged brain is misfiring, so I'll state it again:Is every trade made by a superior trader with an inferior one a "scam"?
>>539489499>Trading is a zero sum game.Wrong.>cheatInsider trading isn't cheating.>muh information asymmetryThat would entail almost all legal stock trades are "cheating".
>>539479689It's not so much that there's direct victims (although there kind of are - the stock market IS a zero-sum game), it's more about the fact that if it was allowed, it would create all sorts of wrong incentives to serve oneself rather than do the thing one was put in their position to do. I want my elected officials to serve me, not to spend their time trying to influence the market with their power in such a way that they can use secret knowledge to make bank. A corporate entity should want the same thing from its executives and employees.
>>539489684>no u
>>539489523>>539489575Nobel laureate economists said it. What's your next excuse, deflection, or non-argument?
>>539489623> no crying in the casinokill every investment banker
>>539489684>>Trading is a zero sum game.>Wrong.Do you even understand how stock market works? To sell someone has to buy and vice versa. It is zero fucking sum.
>>53947988410/10 post from a Jack. Rare indeed.
>>539489529>>539489617>subtly trying to move the goalposts after you got BTFO and realized how stupid you lookKEK!You claimed that lying is insider trading. It isn't.You got humiliated.
>>539489684kill every investment bankerburn down wall street
>>539489684Sorry, every major country that operates an exchange disagrees.
>>539489694>the stock market IS a zero-sum gameIt isn't.People/institutions have different risk/longevity/etc. profiles and trade expectation for volatility.
>>539489623We have different definitions of "Superior trader" as such I already answered the question by stating that you view scammers as "superior traders"In the event that both parties have access to the same info then no its not a scam.In the example you are trying to argue for however where one side has secret information about the outcome then yes its a scam.You still havent answered the car question. Or this guys coin flip question either >>539482733
>>539489727>the Nobel laureate operates a major exchangeWhich major exchanges allow insider trading?
>>539479884In addition the person on the other end of the trade that did not have insider information was taken advantage of.
>>539489784I described liars doing insider trading you fucking midwit by lying and keeping their inside information for themselves away from stock holders and lying to stock holders to get into good positions which is fucking form of insider trading. As they had knowledge they did not share with shareholders that they should have shared, but lied (legally) using creative financial reporting to show completely different state of company. Still they had the knowledge other stock holders did not have that they used to fuck over other stock holders. Which is insider trading you fucking faggot.
>>539489775You're so stupid and ignorant.You don't even understand the fundamentals of economics.Here's a tip for you: Number of shares times share price (i.e. nominal value) does not equal fundamental value to a particular individual or institution: >>539489846.
>>539479689The people that have ti trade after without insider knowledge.
>>539489799No. Kill every socialist.Burn down the Marxist madrasas.
>>539489256Yes you’re selling a something to someone under you know will decline in value and give no indication that it will decline in value you are not selling the something you are advertising to the buyer that’s a scam and you are using false pretenses even if just by withholding information If it’s public info then whoever wants to make the purchase can have access to this info freely use it to make a decision instead of this info being withheld for the benefit of the insider
>>539489982>121 posts by this ID defending insider tradingSaaaaaaaar
>>539489814Sorry, Nobel prize-winning economists disagree.
>>539489963Poland, you are not stupid, you are smart.I’m just letting you know.
>>539489868>We have different definitions of "Superior trader"List them next to each other so we can pin down our disagreement.
>>539489982these things are not physicaly connected to price of the action you retard. Selling and buyng stock on the market is zero sum game. You can have bankrupt company that is worth a lot like GME because stockholders refuse to sell. And good company having low value because there is noone to buy. For actions to raise or fall you have to buy or sell. Without this you get flatline.I've personally beed hooked on companies with +2000% income where I couldn't cash out because there was noone who wanted to buy it.You have zero knowledge about stock market. Do you even trade faggot?
>>539489540Can you even read?
>>539490088>checkedHe literally doesn't understand what zero sum game means.>>539489982
>>539490072were not doing "occupy wall street" with "im an economics major at columbia university". were doing "execute wall street" with "burn down columbia university"
>>539490135You seem to do this alot, you ask for information thats already in the post you're replying to.Try reading it again.
>>539479689The public.>wow that was hardIt's easy to do legitimate insider trading all day erryday.>don't do business in public
>>539490095Every major exchange> greater institutional knowledge than one economist.
>>539489946>the person on the other end of the trade that did not have insider information was taken advantage of.What about non-insider information?What exactly do you claim is the relevant difference?
>>539490255Ironically when he sourced his argument he sourced a jew and didnt respond when It was pointed out.>Friedman was born in Brooklyn, New York City, on July 31, 1912. His parents, Sára Ethel (née Landau) and Jenő Saul Friedman, were Jewish
>>539489963You claimed the act of lying was insider trading, you lying fuck: >>539488457>>539490111No, he is stupid, just like you.He falsely claimed lying is insider trading.He falsely claimed the stock market is a zero-sum game.
>>539490253/thread
>>539489886>>the Nobel laureate operates a major exchangeNo one said that. You're hallucinating.>Which major exchanges allow insider trading?Commodity and future exchanges such as CME and ICE.Trading on your own material non-public information (MNPI) is completely legal on the CME and ICE.Before you ask an LLM, note that insider trading is NOT the same as trading on ILLEGALLY OBTAINED information.
>>539490066Nope.
>>539490323It doesn’t even matter to me whether Friedman is Jewish.
Imagine a public lottery and the guys working with said lottery already picked all the major winning tickets from the lot. That's illustrative of insider trading in its most extreme form.>a type of fraud in which the advertised opportunities never existed in practice
>>539479689If insider trading doesn't hurt anyone, why is it a crime? why has society collectively decided that you're a piece of shit if you do it?
>>539490206I'm actually Canadian and I can sense some major jugaadmaxxing>t. On Vacation in Greece with a polish SIMTotal Jeet Death. This is the market on Jugaad, they will absolutely destroy everything and all trust in society.
>>539490078>every trader on stock markets should be obligated to give their counterparty their research and assessment of a stock's fundamental valueYou're actually a fucking idiot.
>>539490088>how dare you defend your thesis
>>539490555Yes — insider trading is illegal on CME (Chicago Mercantile Exchange) and ICE (Intercontinental Exchange), just as it is across all major regulated markets in the United States.Here’s the technical breakdown:• U.S. securities law: Insider trading prohibitions come from the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and are enforced by the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission).• Commodity law overlap: Because CME and ICE also deal in futures and derivatives, the CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission) enforces parallel rules against trading on non‑public, material information.• Exchange compliance: Both CME and ICE have strict compliance departments. Their rulebooks explicitly prohibit misuse of confidential information, with penalties ranging from fines to permanent bans.• Enforcement examples: Traders caught using insider information in futures or options markets have faced criminal charges, civil penalties, and lifetime trading suspensions.• Systemic risk: Allowing insider trading would undermine confidence in derivatives markets, which depend heavily on transparency and fair access to information.So while CME and ICE are not “stock exchanges” in the traditional sense (they’re futures and derivatives exchanges), insider trading is just as illegal there as it is on the NYSE or NASDAQ.Aw fuck, it looks like you’re wrong?
>>539490206>He literally doesn't understand what zero sum game means.You literally don't. You think nominal cash or shares = wealth.That's how retarded and illiterate you are.
>>539490730>how dare you call a jeet a jeet
>>539490730>he thinks shitposting is a thesis.BRUH LMAO
>>539490246Nope. You're lying as usual.I asked for your DEFINITIONS.
>>539490678Idc if this is ai it’s easily verifiable info and you are retarded
>>539489499>>539489775>>539490171Stupid fucking idiot redditor.>A zero-sum game means that for one person to win, another person must lose the exact same amount. Poker and sports betting are classic zero-sum games — the amount of money on the table is strictly fixed.>The stock market is fundamentally different. It is a positive-sum game, meaning the total amount of wealth in the system can grow, allowing multiple participants to win simultaneously.>Different Goals, Not Just Different Bets>It is a common misconception that in every trade, one person thinks the stock will go up and the other thinks it will go down. In reality, buyers and sellers usually just have different life circumstances and time horizons:>The Seller (Needs Liquidity): They might be retiring, buying a house, or rebalancing their portfolio. They need cash today and are happy to lock in the gains they have made over the years.>The Buyer (Needs Growth): They might be young, have excess savings, and want to invest for decades. They want to hold an asset that will compound over time.>Both parties get exactly what they want from the transaction. The seller gets the cash they need, and the buyer gets a productive asset for their future. No one had to be tricked into taking a loss for the trade to happen.
>>539490555Trading on the basis of MNPI Is notInsider TradingThere is an imperative distinction.
>>539490255Nobel laureate economist > greater knowledge of ECONOMICS than someone RUNNING a market.
>>539490771>>539490924>seething
>>539490730What exactly is your thesis, anyway? That you, a brown subhuman shitbag with a micropenis, should be allowed to ignore the collective judgement of a human society because you don't see anything wrong with your shitbag behavior? I hope we all start playing by your rules, so we can freely exterminate you vermin and be done with it.
>>539490178Can you?
>>539490678Just one question:How did he get reliable information that would not also be available to other traders (if they made the effort to look for it)?In other words the implication is that he has some kind of secret source others do not have access to.>congrats, you discovered the definition of insider tradingBut it goes further: how does this deal work out for that secret source?
>>539490253>The public.Wrong.The public benefits because prices are more accurate.
>>539490635>If insider trading doesn't hurt anyone, why is it a crime?Because people are stupid and vote for stupid things.
>>539490985The market has greater knowledge of the market than any single economist, lmao.If only you knew how stupid your statement was. Sadly, you’re unable to comprehend it.What a fool you are.
>>539491029You're so pissed for being wrong. You're only good for laughing at otherwise you're only good for killing time and you're even bad at that
>>539490924Who wrote this retarded shit?>wealth in the system can grow"the system" is a trader inside itself?>yes, in insider tradinglmao
>>539491097Many of the countries which operate major exchanges are not necessarily democracies. They have all come to the conclusion that insider trading is not accepted behaviour though. How strange that is.
>hurr durr. Pain is only physical I am an ESL retard hurrrrrr
>>539490761No, you're wrong. You fell into the trap I even INFORMED you about.The provided text is wrong because it fundamentally conflates securities law (stocks) with commodities law (futures/derivatives). It assumes that the SEC and the CFTC treat "insider trading" the same way, which is factually incorrect.Here is a breakdown of exactly why the claims in that text are wrong or highly misleading when applied to the CME and ICE.1. The "Parallel Rules" Myth Text claim: "Because CME and ICE also deal in futures and derivatives, the CFTC... enforces parallel rules against trading on non-public, material information."Why it's wrong: The CFTC does not enforce "parallel rules" to the SEC regarding material non-public information (MNPI). The SEC generally prohibits trading on MNPI to ensure a level playing field for investors. The CFTC explicitly allows market participants to trade on their own MNPI. If an energy company secretly decides to shut down a pipeline, they are legally allowed to trade futures on the CME based on that secret before telling the public. The CFTC only prohibits trading on misappropriated (stolen) information or embargoed government data.
>>5394907612. Misinterpreting "Misuse of Confidential Information" Text claim: "Their rulebooks explicitly prohibit misuse of confidential information..." and traders face bans for using "insider information."Why it's wrong: The text conflates stealing information with possessing information. When CME and ICE rulebooks ban the "misuse of confidential information," they are referring to misappropriation and front-running. It is illegal for a broker to see a client's upcoming massive trade and secretly place their own trade first (front-running). It is illegal to bribe a government official for an unreleased crop report. However, it is completely legal for a company to use its own confidential business data to trade. The text implies that any use of secret information is a violation, which is false in derivatives markets.
Anons, I think we should allow insider trading, but only for those of us who agree that it’s wrong.What do yall think?
>>5394907613. The "Fair Access to Information" Fallacy Text claim: "Allowing insider trading would undermine confidence in derivatives markets, which depend heavily on transparency and fair access to information."Why it's wrong: Derivatives markets do not depend on "fair access to information." They operate on the exact opposite principle. They are hedging markets designed for commercial entities to offload risk.Information asymmetry is a core, legal feature of these markets. An agricultural giant with a global network of private satellites and agronomists is expected and allowed to have better, faster, and more secretive information than a retail trader. If the CFTC required "fair access to information" (forcing companies to publish their proprietary data before hedging their risks), companies would stop using the CME and ICE to hedge, which would actually destroy the market.SummaryThe text completely mischaracterizes the commodities and futures markets. In derivatives, trading on your own non-public, material information isn't a systemic risk—it is the standard operating procedure that allows the market to function.
>>539490828Not an argument.
>>539491246>I am right because I'm clearly the judge of rightousness. I went to law school and everything. Thus the definition of pain in this context means what I want. Look at how inflexible I am in my thinking everyone! Everyone is wrong except me! You're all stupid! I am the smartest 4chinner.
>>539490913No, you retard. Traders (hedge funds, etc.) don't have to disclose their research and assessment to their counterparties, YOU STUPID FUCK.
>>539491318it’s illegal. Your semantic nonsense won’t make a difference to the SEC.
>>539491412You're not even OP yet your defending their post. The levels of stupidity is great. Please, keep having a meltdown
My thesis is that OP is a faggot.
>>539491097I get that your kind are birthed and raised in filthy warrens where you feast on each other's shit and corpses and have zero trust for one another, but here in the human world we have what's called a social contract that many of our laws are based upon, and we consider insider trading to be a form of cheating. It does not matter if you disagree with this, because you are attempting to live within our societies and our rules, and your seething will not change them. In fact if you seethe enough we'll likely end up getting so tired of your behavior that we'll ethnically cleanse you for it.
>>539491532Based Poland.
>>539491289It may be better to simply abolish public trading in this form.>now everything is insider tradingSuddenly they no longer have any suckers they could fool, only each other.>only one insider trading can harm is insider tradingAnd the general public derives no real benefit from these markets; they are, on average, poorly informed suckers.Could still buy fonds or whatever, managed by competing insider traders.>invest in the best insider tradersMakes sense desu.
>>539491412>NUH UH YOURE WRONG IM RIGHT YOUR INFO IS FAKELosing it
>>539491482>you're not allowed to defend something you agree with because OP did it firstKill yourself, retard.
>>539491412>142 posts by this ID in a 1 post by this ID OP threadKys
>>539491546Back at you, beaner. I'm White.
Yes — if someone holds a Series 7 license (the General Securities Representative qualification) and trades on the basis of material non‑public information (MNPI), they have committed a securities law violation.Here’s the breakdown:• Insider trading offense: Trading on MNPI is prohibited under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The SEC and FINRA treat it as insider trading, regardless of whether the trader profits.• Series 7 obligations: A Series 7 holder is bound by FINRA rules and securities laws. They are expected to uphold market integrity and compliance standards. Using MNPI breaches both.• Disclosure duty: The obligation is not to disclose MNPI publicly — that itself would be illegal. Instead, the duty is to abstain from trading until the information is made public. The “disclose or abstain” principle applies: either disclose the information broadly (through proper corporate channels) or refrain from trading.• Consequences: Violations can lead to SEC enforcement actions, criminal prosecution, civil penalties, disgorgement of profits, and revocation of the Series 7 license.So: Yes, it’s an offense. No, they don’t have a right to disclose MNPI to justify trading. Their obligation is to ABSTAIN.
>>539491653>abolish public tradingwhats needed is to let the banks fail and let the bankers die
>>539491655>t. has never tradedI've never once had to disclose my knowledge while trading.How fucking stupid are you?
Yes — shareholders also have an obligation to abstain from trading if they possess material non‑public information (MNPI). The prohibition isn’t limited to licensed professionals like Series 7 holders; it applies to anyone who trades securities while in possession of MNPI.Here’s the breakdown:• Universal prohibition: U.S. securities law applies to all market participants. Whether you’re a retail investor, institutional trader, or corporate insider, trading on MNPI is illegal.• Shareholder status: Simply being a shareholder doesn’t create MNPI. But if a shareholder gains access to confidential corporate information (e.g., earnings before release, merger talks, regulatory decisions), they must abstain.• Disclose or abstain principle: The rule is clear — either disclose the information broadly through proper channels (like SEC filings or press releases) or abstain from trading until it becomes public. Shareholders cannot “tip” others either; tipping is itself a violation.• Consequences: Violations can lead to SEC enforcement, civil penalties, criminal charges, disgorgement of profits, and reputational damage. Even small trades can trigger liability if based on MNPI.• Case law: Landmark cases (e.g., SEC v. Texas Gulf Sulphur) established that anyone with MNPI — not just officers or directors — must abstain from trading until the information is public.So yes: shareholders are bound by the same abstain obligation as licensed reps. The law doesn’t care if you’re a CEO, a Series 7 broker, or a small shareholder — if you trade on MNPI, it’s insider trading.
>>539491431Wrong.
>>539491720Nice non-argument.
>>539491861Ssssssaaaaar
>>539491370I accept your concession.
>>539491861>146 posts defending insider trading. Something which is illegal basically everywhere.
No one can legally trade on material non‑public information (MNPI). That’s the entire foundation of insider trading law: if the information is material (i.e., it would influence an investor’s decision) and non‑public (not broadly available to the market), trading on it is prohibited.Here’s the breakdown:• Corporate insiders: Executives, directors, employees — they must abstain until information is disclosed through proper channels (e.g., SEC filings, press releases).• Shareholders: Even ordinary shareholders who happen to learn MNPI (say, through a leak or privileged access) are bound by the same abstain obligation.• Licensed professionals: Brokers, analysts, and investment bankers with Series 7 or other licenses face even stricter scrutiny, but the prohibition applies universally.• Tippees: If someone receives MNPI from an insider (a “tip”), they cannot trade on it either. Liability extends down the chain.• Regulators’ stance: The SEC and FINRA enforce the “disclose or abstain” principle. Either the information is made public through proper disclosure, or no one trades on it.So the answer is blunt: no one can legally trade on MNPI. The only way to trade lawfully is to wait until the information is public.
>>539491202So?
>>539491939>this is the market on jugaad
>>539491199LOL! Are you ESL? Work on your reading comprehension, retard.
No — there is no legitimate market in the world where trading on material non‑public information (MNPI) is legal or accepted.Here’s the breakdown:• Global prohibition: Across major jurisdictions — U.S., EU, UK, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia — insider trading laws explicitly ban trading on MNPI. Regulators like the SEC, FCA, ESMA, and ASIC enforce this aggressively.• Emerging markets: Even in developing economies, securities laws typically include insider trading bans. Enforcement may be weaker, but legality is not granted.• Exchange rules: Every major exchange (NYSE, NASDAQ, CME, ICE, LSE, TSE, etc.) has compliance frameworks prohibiting insider trading. Violations lead to suspension, fines, or criminal prosecution.• Case law precedent: Landmark cases worldwide reinforce that MNPI trading undermines market integrity. Courts consistently uphold bans.• Practical reality: In some countries, enforcement may be lax or politically selective, but that’s a matter of weak oversight — not legality.So the answer is clear: no regulated market permits trading on MNPI. The only “markets” where it might occur are informal, unregulated, or outright illegal exchanges — essentially black‑market trading, not recognized financial systems.
>>539491179You're so pissed for being wrong. You're only good for laughing at otherwise you're only good for killing time and you're even bad at that
>>539491112>single economistMultiple economists.So you agree commodity and future markets are correct in allowing insider trading?
But the ghost of Milton Friedman said it was okay?The “ghost of Milton Friedman” might have said a lot of things in jest, but in reality Friedman never endorsed insider trading as legal or acceptable. He was a staunch advocate of free markets and transparent competition, but even he recognized that markets only function if participants trust that prices reflect fair information.Here’s the reality check:• Insider trading prohibition: Trading on material non‑public information (MNPI) is illegal worldwide. It undermines market integrity and investor confidence.• Friedman’s actual stance: He argued for minimal government intervention, but always within the framework of voluntary exchange and transparency. Insider trading violates that principle because it’s coercive — one party has hidden knowledge the other cannot access.• Market trust: Without trust, markets collapse. If insider trading were allowed, retail investors would flee, liquidity would dry up, and exchanges would become playgrounds for the privileged few.• Legal enforcement: Regulators like the SEC and CFTC prosecute insider trading aggressively. No “ghostly blessing” changes that.
>>539491412>their research and assessmentWhat does this have to do with insider trading?>everybody could do the very same research with the exact same informationThat's the important part, not whatever your research results are.
I get the joke — but historically, Milton Friedman never actually said insider trading was “okay.” What he did argue (and this is where the confusion comes in) is that insider trading might, in theory, help markets incorporate information faster. In other words, if someone with privileged knowledge trades, the price moves toward the “true” value more quickly.But here’s the catch:• Efficiency vs fairness: Friedman’s musings were about efficiency, not legality. He never campaigned to make insider trading lawful.• Legal reality: U.S. law is crystal clear — trading on material non‑public information (MNPI) is illegal, regardless of any efficiency argument.• Ethical dimension: Even if insider trading speeds up price discovery, it does so by exploiting unequal access, which destroys trust and participation.• Academic debate: Some economists have toyed with the idea that insider trading could be “informationally efficient,” but regulators and courts reject that because markets need fairness as much as speed.So if Friedman’s “ghost” said it was okay, it’s a mischievous echo of his efficiency argument — not a real endorsement. In practice, no jurisdiction allows it, because the collapse of trust would outweigh any theoretical benefit.
>>539491049Don't be a pussy and actually make your argument so I can point out the fallacy you're committing.
>>539492046>152 posts by this ID defending insider trading>claims its a thesis>calls others madSeek help. This thread is already dying an early death.
>>539492194Nevermind that when Friedman made this statement publicly he was seeking insider information to trade with.
>>539492019Evidently you have far more severe problems than this. I recommend you stay out of the market.
>>539492022Already debunked: >>539491246>>539491276>>539491318
>>539491809The company itself discloses any of that info through sec filings as part of the law as my other post stated but you didn’t read
>>539479689Outsider traders
>>539492248Let’s insider trade Poland, ur cool.
>>539492213lmao you're even the same guy, and you accuse me of lacking reading comprehension? As mentioned before: you're lacking way more than that if my post was somehow incomprehensible.
>>539492103>>539492194>in reality Friedman never endorsed insider trading as legal or acceptable.You're a fucking liar:Yes, Milton Friedman famously supported making insider trading legal and argued that it is actually beneficial to the market.As a Nobel laureate and a leading advocate for free-market economics, Friedman viewed the issue entirely through the lens of market efficiency and information flow.His primary arguments against the prohibition of insider trading centered on two key ideas: Prices as Signals: Friedman argued that for a market to function efficiently, stock prices need to reflect all available information as quickly as possible. When insiders buy or sell stock based on their private knowledge, their trading activity naturally pushes the stock price toward its "true" value. Incentivizing Whistleblowers: He believed that allowing insiders to profit from non-public information gives them a direct financial incentive to expose corporate mismanagement or hidden flaws. If a company is failing, an insider selling their stock signals to the public that something is wrong, acting as an early warning system.During a 2003 interview, Friedman summarized his stance with a quote that is frequently cited in debates about securities regulation:"You want more insider trading, not less. You want to give the people most likely to have knowledge about deficiencies of the company an incentive to make the public aware of that."
>>539491246Correct — insider trading is illegal under the jurisdiction of the CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission) right now, just as it is under the SEC for securities markets.Here’s the technical breakdown:• CFTC authority: The CFTC regulates futures, options, and swaps markets. Its rules prohibit trading on MNPI when that information comes from a duty of trust or confidence (e.g., corporate insiders, government officials, or exchange employees).• Overlap with SEC: While the SEC enforces insider trading laws in securities markets (stocks, bonds), the CFTC enforces parallel prohibitions in commodities and derivatives markets. Together, they cover virtually all regulated financial instruments.• Rule 180.1: This is the CFTC’s broad anti‑fraud provision, modeled after SEC Rule 10b‑5. It explicitly bans manipulative or deceptive devices, including trading on MNPI.• Enforcement cases: The CFTC has prosecuted traders for misusing confidential government reports, energy market data, or exchange information. Penalties include fines, bans, and criminal referrals.• Systemic risk: Because derivatives markets are highly leveraged, insider trading here can destabilize entire sectors (energy, agriculture, financial futures).So yes — insider trading is illegal in CFTC‑regulated markets right now. The prohibition is universal across U.S. financial regulation: no one can legally trade on material non‑public information, whether it’s stocks, futures, or swaps.
>>539492174>>539490678
>>539492248Not a single sentence in your post is an argument or rebuttal.You're just seething because you lost.
>>539492400Milton Friedman, far from tolerating insider trading, would have thundered against it as a betrayal of capitalism itself. “The market works best when everyone has the same information,” he declared, insisting that transparency was the lifeblood of free exchange. For him, “trust is the foundation of free exchange,” and insider trading was nothing but a dagger aimed at that trust. He warned that “without rules, markets collapse into chaos,” and saw insider trading as the ultimate chaos agent. In his vision, “fairness is not optional; it is essential,” because without fairness, the invisible hand becomes a clenched fist. As he put it, “the invisible hand cannot guide a market riddled with deception.” In this reframing, Friedman becomes the prophet of market integrity, condemning insider trading as the rot that would hollow out capitalism from within.Ironic.
>>539492302>>539492213>mmmmm oh yeah that’s a fallacy>o-oh my god i-im gonna DEBOOONK>IM DEBOOOOONKING >OH YES YES YES IM SO RIGHT THEYRE SO WRONG OH MY GOD
>>539489058>they would take all the money out of itThis retard doesn't know what he's babbling about, LMAO!
>>539479689Indeed, in fact, If pedophilia is fine then insider trading is fine.
>>539492584IM SORRY SARR, but you’ve been…DEBUNKED!!!!!!!!
>>539492583>making shit upOk retard
>>539492437The text you provided sounds highly technical and authoritative, but it relies on a fundamental misunderstanding of financial regulation. It conflates securities law (stocks and bonds, regulated by the SEC) with commodities and derivatives law (futures and swaps, regulated by the CFTC).The concluding claim—that "no one can legally trade on material non-public information, whether it’s stocks, futures, or swaps"—is factually false.Here is a technical breakdown debunking the specific errors in the text.1. The Myth of "Parallel Prohibitions" (SEC vs. CFTC)
>>539492733Why don’t you check the quotes then?
>>539492437The Claim: "While the SEC enforces insider trading laws in securities markets... the CFTC enforces parallel prohibitions in commodities and derivatives markets."The Reality: The SEC and CFTC do not have parallel prohibitions. They operate under two entirely different legal frameworks for information asymmetry: The SEC (Classical Theory): If you are a corporate insider, you owe a fiduciary duty to your shareholders. You cannot trade your own company’s stock based on material non-public information (MNPI) without disclosing it first. The CFTC (No Classical Theory): In derivatives and futures markets, there are no shareholders and no fiduciary duties owed to the trader on the other side of your contract. The "classical theory" of insider trading literally does not apply to the CFTC. A commercial market participant is completely allowed to trade on their own lawfully generated MNPI.2. Misrepresenting CFTC Rule 180.1
>>539492756 Trading on material non-public information (MNPI) is illegal for anyone under securities laws.
>>539492437The Claim: "Rule 180.1... explicitly bans manipulative or deceptive devices, including trading on MNPI."The Reality: This is a vast oversimplification that omits the most important part of the rule. Rule 180.1 bans fraud and the misappropriation (stealing) of information. It does not create a blanket ban on trading with MNPI.When the CFTC finalized Rule 180.1 in 2011, they explicitly wrote this into the federal register to protect commercial hedgers:"It is not a violation of final Rule 180.1 to withhold information that a market participant lawfully possesses about market conditions. The failure to disclose such market information prior to entering into a transaction... will not, by itself, constitute a violation."If you legally possess the information (e.g., an airline internally knows it is secretly buying 50 new planes), you can legally trade futures (e.g., buying jet fuel contracts) without disclosing it to the public.3. Conflating Misappropriation with General Insider Trading
>>539492806Yes. CFTC prohibits trading on MNPI in commodities, futures, and derivatives markets.
>>539492437The Claim: "Its rules prohibit trading on MNPI when that information comes from a duty of trust or confidence..."The Reality: This specific bullet point is actually the only accurate sentence in the text, but the author draws the wrong conclusion from it.The CFTC absolutely prosecutes trading on MNPI if the information was stolen, leaked by a government official, or obtained by breaching an employer's trust (known as the Misappropriation Theory). However, the author jumps from "you cannot trade on stolen information" to "no one can legally trade on MNPI," completely ignoring the massive, legal carve-out for proprietary commercial information.4. The "Systemic Risk" Fallacy
>>539492437The Claim: "Because derivatives markets are highly leveraged, insider trading here can destabilize entire sectors..."The Reality: In derivatives markets, forcing companies to disclose their MNPI before trading would actually cause systemic risk.Derivatives markets exist so commercial entities (farmers, oil drillers, airlines) can hedge their physical business risks. If an agricultural giant discovers a fungus in their own private grain silos, they need to buy wheat futures immediately to hedge against their upcoming losses. If the law forced them to announce the fungus to the public before they could trade, the market price would spike instantly, destroying their ability to hedge. Information asymmetry isn't a bug in the futures market; it is the exact mechanism that drives price discovery and allows the market to function.The Bottom Line: If a CEO trades their own stock based on a secret earnings report, it is a federal crime under the SEC. If an oil company trades crude futures based on their own secret plans to shut down a pipeline, it is completely legal under the CFTC. The prohibition is definitively not universal.
>>539492767They're fake.
>>539492879Yes. Obligation to abstain from trading on MNPI applies under US securities laws (SEC and CFTC).Because of the obligation to abstain, if you do not, you have committed an offence.
>>539492890False.This is exactly where the confusion usually lies, but as a blanket statement, that claim is incorrect.The CFTC does not prohibit trading on MNPI across the board. What they prohibit is trading on misappropriated (stolen or leaked) MNPI.Here is how the law (specifically CFTC Rule 180.1) actually works: What is Illegal: You cannot trade if you obtained the MNPI through fraud, deception, or by breaching a duty of trust. For example, trading on an unreleased government report, or an employee secretly using their employer's confidential data for personal gain, is strictly prohibited under the misappropriation theory. What is Legal: Rule 180.1 explicitly states that market participants are not required to disclose non-public information that they lawfully possess before making a trade. You are fully allowed to trade futures and derivatives based on your own proprietary research, internal business plans, or lawfully generated MNPI.In short: in CFTC-regulated markets, stealing MNPI to trade is a crime, but lawfully possessing and trading on your own MNPI is completely legal.
>>539492979No they aren’t.
