SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
If the government really wanted to protect us from ourselves they would limit gambling, which costs poor people a lot and is known to result in unfavorable odds, and they would discontinue the lottery. Instead because the lottery and gambling make the government and big institutions money they are legal. Restricting pattern day trading is, likewise, an attempt to give those with money more leverage over those without money. This law directly discriminates against those without money and it was passed by those with money. The government has essentially passed two sets of laws, one for the rich and one for the poor.
These laws were undemocratically passed by the rich for the rich under the false pretense of protecting the poor. Such is a hallmark of an aristocracy. No nation should have a different set of laws for the rich than for the poor.
The entire Wikipedia article, especially all the criticisms, are worth reading.
FINRA (formerly National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. or NASD) rule applies to any customer who buys and sells a particular security in the same trading day (day trades), and does this four or more times in any five consecutive business day period; the rule applies to margin accounts, but not to cash accounts. A pattern day trader is subject to special rules. The main rule is that in order to engage in pattern day trading you must maintain an equity balance of at least $25,000 in a margin account.
[...] The SEC believes that people whose account equity is less than $25,000 may represent less-sophisticated traders, who may be less able to handle the losses that may be associated with day trades.
(Score: 2) by n1 on Monday May 15 2017, @02:20AM (2 children)
I take full responsibility for publishing this story. I found it interesting enough to put it up, my assumption was not many people would be aware of these rules and barriers to entry and could generate some interesting discussions, which seems to have been achieved.
As another commenter put it, Soylent News ...is people. I felt this fit in with that, but you are right... I could/should have included some more relevant stuff with current FINRA/SEC regulation news. This is certainly an exception rather than the rule, I used my editorial discretion on this occasion.
If we do go forward with an 'op-ed' nexus, it would certainly be used sparingly and subject to the discretion of the editors if it gets published, or would be better suited to a journal.
Anyway, I appreciate your position and concern in regard to this type of story, and it's not something I have any intention of pushing regularly.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 15 2017, @03:15AM
Folks who are aware that the London Stock Exchange fell on its face multiple times during trading hours--once for 7 hours--after which they switched from an all-MICROS~1 stack to a Linux stack already know the tech angle.
http://www.google.com/search?tbs=li:1&q=London.Stock.Exchange+Linux+7.hours [google.com]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday May 15 2017, @01:45PM
To be clear, I wasn't directly attacking the choice to post this, just sort of "wondering aloud" what the guidelines might be for TMB's proposed "Op-Ed" section and giving my thoughts.
I agree that it may be good to have stuff posted on issues that may be of interest to the community, even if there's not a recent news tie-in. My main concern is about quality (see what I posted in reply to TMB above).