President Biden signed a bill that states if TikTok doesn't cut ties with its China-based parent company ByteDance over the next nine months to a year, it will be banned in the U.S.
Just to clarify. Insider trading is illegal but it is not illegal for politicians in Congress to use the information they obtain from their jobs (such as through classified meetings) to engage in stock market trades.
MYTH: Members of Congress are exempt from insider trading laws.
FACT: Both a Congressional Research Service Report and House Administration Committee memo indicates that Members of Congress are subject to the same insider trading rules as the general public.
That doesn’t change the law. It’s simply evidence that Congress lives above it. Seven Democrat Senators sponsored a bill in September to ban the practice entirely. It died at introduction.
You have a philosophy around what laws are and what they mean that is incongruent with reality.
What is the word we use when people have believes that don’t match up with the previous or future state of things?
Laws on paper are only one aspect of what a law is. How those laws are interpreted and how they are enforced matter far, far more. Law is what is applied and enforced. If something is a ‘law’ but is not enforced, then its not really law.
And its fine that you have a different philosophy around what the law means. I just don’t find it particularly useful because it doesn’t predict the past, present, or future states of the world.
Fun fact: Everyone with hundreds of millions+ in holdings either trades with insider information or pays others to do it, because our metrics and enforcement for insider trading are a gallows joke.
It wasn’t put to a vote after being read aloud on two separate introductions. It was then forwarded to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee where it went to die.
It’s a catch-22. To get elected, you need to learn to manipulate within the system. Once elected, you know how to leverage the system, so why would you change it?
The best chance we’ll have for systemic change will come when boomers die off. That shouldn’t discourage efforts today, but impart some hope for the future.
I want to believe that the most change will happens when boomers are gone, but I don’t trust that the new era of politicians won’t get caught up in the game.
I’d be fine if they were allowed to invest in things like mutual funds so that they could take advantage of the market without being able to do insider trading of a specific stock.
Fun fact: Congresspeople can legally inside trade, but the rest of us cannot.
That’s not true. It’s still illegal even though they get away with it. You’re thinking of
briberylobbying.Just to clarify. Insider trading is illegal but it is not illegal for politicians in Congress to use the information they obtain from their jobs (such as through classified meetings) to engage in stock market trades.
MYTH: Members of Congress are exempt from insider trading laws.
FACT: Both a Congressional Research Service Report and House Administration Committee memo indicates that Members of Congress are subject to the same insider trading rules as the general public.
https://perry.house.gov/how-can-scott-help/myths-about-congress.htm#:~:text=FACT%3A Both a Congressional Research
If everyone doing it gets away with it, then is it actually illegal?
Martha. Stewart.
Yes. It is. They just need to be arrested and prosecuted. I agree that it should be taken more seriously, considering that it’s against the law.
No one has ever been prosecuted in the decade and change that it has been illegal, despite frequent violations.
That doesn’t change the law. It’s simply evidence that Congress lives above it. Seven Democrat Senators sponsored a bill in September to ban the practice entirely. It died at introduction.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/2773/all-actions-without-amendments
Oh you sweet summer child.
Now you’re wrong, and condescending. Lol
You have a philosophy around what laws are and what they mean that is incongruent with reality.
What is the word we use when people have believes that don’t match up with the previous or future state of things?
Laws on paper are only one aspect of what a law is. How those laws are interpreted and how they are enforced matter far, far more. Law is what is applied and enforced. If something is a ‘law’ but is not enforced, then its not really law.
And its fine that you have a different philosophy around what the law means. I just don’t find it particularly useful because it doesn’t predict the past, present, or future states of the world.
In other words:
spoiler
Fun fact: Everyone with hundreds of millions+ in holdings either trades with insider information or pays others to do it, because our metrics and enforcement for insider trading are a gallows joke.
Politicians should be banned from stock market. Total conflict of interest.
Eight Democrat Senators agree with you, and cosponsored a bill in September that died at introduction.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/2773/all-actions-without-amendments
What does that mean?
It wasn’t put to a vote after being read aloud on two separate introductions. It was then forwarded to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee where it went to die.
They don’t review it and then hand it back to congress?
If they see value in the bill they can mandate a vote. That was over six months ago, so I wouldn’t hold my breath.
if we keep electing people trying to maintain the status quo, then it’ll never happen
It’s a catch-22. To get elected, you need to learn to manipulate within the system. Once elected, you know how to leverage the system, so why would you change it?
The best chance we’ll have for systemic change will come when boomers die off. That shouldn’t discourage efforts today, but impart some hope for the future.
I want to believe that the most change will happens when boomers are gone, but I don’t trust that the new era of politicians won’t get caught up in the game.
Good Work just recently put out a video on this very topic. Informative and hilarious as usual!
https://youtu.be/vT-u-SPj4_c
Thanks! I never heard of this show.
I’d be fine if they were allowed to invest in things like mutual funds so that they could take advantage of the market without being able to do insider trading of a specific stock.
that would be better, but they could still invest in specific sectors or industries.
Yep, and maybe that’s somewhat acceptable, but we could also congratulations it to diversified mutual funds meeting specific criteria.
Congratulations!
But yeah you gotta limit it