- Joined
- Mar 25, 2011
- Messages
- 23,308
- Reaction score
- 6,428
Citation?
Why didn't anyone tell me we could just sue the brokerage when we lose our ass in a trade? I'd have been making risky plays for years!
Citation?
The same people pissed at RH for stopping Uncle Joe from using leverage to pile into a stock that was trading at 130x trailing 12 mos net income (net income that declined over 50% YoY) as of this morning, would normally be the same ones saying RH took advantage of Uncle Joe by letting him act like a dumb ass.
Citation?
Do people get mad at online brokerage firms when the market tanks? Was there a huge backlash against Etrade, Charles Schwab, etc. in 08 that I was unaware of?
Think you're just making stuff up.
Here RH is probably getting sued regardless now and obviously has a big PR issue. They're just a deer in the headlights of several oncoming trucks now.
The real fallout from all of this will be to see how Congress and regulators ultimately change rules. Will it be to further restrict access to public markets for the average Joe or will it be to loosen it up. The populists in this case obviously want more access. But is that how the rules will be changed?
The real fallout from all of this will be to see how Congress and regulators ultimately change rules. Will it be to further restrict access to public markets for the average Joe or will it be to loosen it up. The populists in this case obviously want more access. But is that how the rules will be changed?
This we agree on. Huge litmus test for the Democratically controlled government. Will they continue to bail out corporations, or has the progressive push of the last decade started to change the party?
If they choose Wall Street and limit access, its a big deal. Could leave to some continuous primaries.
this is weird
I don't think the issue is a "bailout" here or maybe I'm not understanding your use of the word. To me the monetary system bailout has been in place for months and isn't going to change. That's the money printer going brrr and the Fed (which supposedly is independent) doing massive QE. Now we'll see what fiscal stimulus the Dems advance (which will likely further boost the markets).
Historically it has been the Dems more than the GOP (or what used to be the GOP) who want to "protect" the little guy from the predators. So I'm thinking maybe you're going to see the Dems likely focus on what they don't want institutions to be able to do vs. expanding what it is the regular Joe has access to do. It was, what, two months ago that Tlaib proposed to put the "STABLE" act in place for crypto. It isn't poor in theory, but in execution it was all wrapped up in making sure the little guy is protected from companies. That's maybe going to be the problem here. The guys like Cruz will say let's just allow more people access and the folks like Tlaib are perhaps more likely to want to not change the access rules but limit what the institutions can do when they trade. Although AOC's certainly screaming about just letting the common guy do his thing. So maybe that will be the course she and others chart.
Sorry not a financial bailout (although I wouldn't put it past these hedge funds to have their hand out) but I meant are they going to change the rules to limit access.
Hmmmm - wow
That is the low point on the day