Fruity, out of your 150 posts, you have barely touched on any relavent topic on trading. Just click on your posts and look at them.
I've been reading the rantings of some on the non trading threads expounding the idea that America is the land of the free. Well the SEC and others with vested interests (Oil, Exchange fat cats etc) are quietly working on disabusing us of that notion. Therefore any action to bring one's disapproval to the SEC's attention must be worthwhile to uphold the rights of the little guy.
And why not forbid casino then ? 25K is not a lot of money for you and for me or others and I even said that for daily scale it is not enough. But for others it can be a lot of money and sorry A GOOD TRADER CAN BEGIN EVEN WITH LESS THAN 25K if he chose the right scale and right market. Imagine a young talentful trader who doesn't have those 25K why should he have to wait 25K ? Those kind of answer just reminds me of the "The Snobbery factor" on a linuxian magazine whose editorial says: http://www.frozen-north-linuxonline.com/index.html "The funny thing is those who are first to respond to a query from a new user with the line "Read the fucking manual" (RTFM) are the same ones who as new users themselves benefited from the careful and patient guidance of older members of a mailing list in the past. " And it is not only about PDT, it's about general rules change that will affect everybody. As for europe they will little by little change the deposit and margin call etc... To cite the same magazine: "Could it be your afraid of the competition? "
Some observations after reading the FT article link at the begining of this thread. The article seems to be very loosely written. Several of the authors points seem to have no substance. e.g... "Under current rules, traders can take out "naked" short positions over an unlimited number of shares" I'm no expert on SEC and stk mkt rules, but there seems to be 2 inaccuracies in that statement alone, and then...."Regulators are less concerned...w/ the most liquid stocks, and may even consider loosening the rules for larger co's." That statement seems to indicate that the decision has already been made. I'm wondering, is this author just trying to sensationalize an issue that really is not on the table?? Are there any other articles/publications/anyone talking about this issue. Handcuffing this industry by not being able to short sounds ridiculous to me (I,m a futures trader).
sammy, unfortunately the PDT rule wouldn't have prevented anything. That was a retail account Barton was trading. He could have easily covered any minimum with the insurance money he collected after killing his first wife and mother-in-law. You can't blame "daytrading" for those deaths now can you? The prop firms might have actually weeded this guy out but he would have eventually blown his money with an online broker. Bottomline this guy was a bad seed!!!!
let me give SEC a piece of suggest, how about instead saying that individuals/small traders cannot PDT, why not ban Instituational/Firm traders from PDT. instead considering to remove the right of short from individuals traders, why not restrict the unlimited privilege from the institutions and special interest groups. I love to see this happen. f8ck all of them.
That's would be logical since they are the majority of operators counting for 95% (in France in US it should be less ) : does it mean that the minority can eat so much of their apple pie
Thanks harrytrader for suggesting my advice to SEC are logical. Let me correct my grammar, a piece of advice. Fingers typed "suggest" rather than "advice" or "suggestion".
Unfortunately you are still missing the point IMO. At least in the US the question should be; "why restrict anyone? What's good for one should be good for all" No special privileges for anyone !