Circuit breaker should be there to cool down the emotion of the participants. How is it related to "uptick" rule? Integrity means "no manipulation" imho. How do you define integrity? The CEOs of the financial companies created the current crisis with 40 to 1 leverage. They had no integrity. What should SEC do to enforce the integrity. Put them in prison?! These CEOs were the root cause of the problem. Instead of admitting their greed, they fooled the public by blaming short selling.
A truer word was never spoken. I really can't understand why retail guys are jonesing for a raping by NYSE specialists.
The SEC's stated mission is And if you've followed the recent history of the SEC you know that most of the time they do the opposite of "protect investors." So just stating their mission as an argument seems pointless to me.
Wherever the political wind is blowing and justifies his existence. You do know that hedge funds are investors, right? to employ bureacrats and create economic rents for market makers at the expense of customers. Every once in a while, a little creep who actually wants to make the markets more efficient sneaks in a rule change or two but the creep working in favour of the customer and his rule changes usually get flushed out the next time there's a jump in volatility. Customers need to be protected from paying smaller transactions costs, apparently.
velocity seems to be bigger because leverage was bigger in this bear market then the previous one from 2001. if you want to eliminate velocity you need to abolish margin.
Yah, and how do you figure that the "integrity of the market" is increased or helped by giving one group of market participants (buyers) an intrinsic advantage over another group of market participants (sellers). If their job is really to ensure integrity in the marketplace, I would think that would include creating an equal and level playing field for both bulls and bears. How come people only complain when the markets go down too fast or too much, but have no problem when the markets go up too fast or too much. Runaway markets to the upside can lead to just as many market dislocations as a runaway market to the downside, and yet its only during a bear market that people bitch and moan. Say what you want to about short sellers, but at least you never hear them bitching and moaning when the market goes up and they get hammered... they just sit back and take their losses and keep quiet. But when the market goes down, man, do the buy and holds whine and cry and pout like babies... not to mention blame everybody else for their trades that don't work out. And in regards to your "velocity of the markets" argument, I would suggest that the introduction of computers and screen based trading has had a much greater impact on market volatility than the elimination of the uptick rule. Why aren't you calling for an elimination or repeal of computer based trading? And really, who cares if the markets are more volatile (or have more velocity) now than they were (or did) 10, 50, or 100 years ago... Last I checked, markets are always changing, and just because they are like this today doesn't mean they'll be this way forever. Isn't adapting to the current market conditions a touchstone of trading? And in a general sense, what kind of traders complain anyways about too much volatility and velocity in the markets? Is it just too easy to make money in these markets and you feel guilty In my opinion, the elimination of the uptick rule was a move towards fairness by treating bulls and bears fairly and equally, while ensuring that neither had an advantage over the other. Now if you want to give the bulls an advantage over the bears thats fine, but just don't do it under the auspices of fairness and integrity because its the exact opposite.
You want an honest politician with no ties to interest groups? That's like saying you want dry water. Incidentally, market makers could always sell short without locating to meet their obligation to provide a two sided market. It's illegal for customers to sell without a locate
I'm sorry, but other than give lip service what is so free market about Bush's administration? How is socializing the entire financial sector, increased regulation across the board and the Patriot act spell "free market" to you? ETFs were never subject to the uptick rule. Neither were NASDAQ traded stocks, nor commodities nor a long list of other securities. The SEC engaged in exhaustive research with regard to the uptick rule and found that while it didn't achieve its intended purpose (which I have a quarrel with anyway), it did suck the liquidity out of thinly traded shares. If something doesn't work, why keep it? You're insinuating something about the Pro Fund Ultras but an insinuated conspiracy doesn't actually prove anything.
minor nitpick: nasdaq NMS stocks were subject to the uptick rule - but that could be circumvented in a bunch of ways (ARCA was easiest). most of the ways to get around it weren't easily available to retail traders.
Brian Hunter who blew up in the nat gas market was in there, so was some fraud last year who didnt even work. its not a perfect. For a moment i thought he was insulting my writing skills, which would be a fact. but thats why i got into Trading and not anything else, i put word to paper like a first grader :