So what does this prove. 1. Need to take out hostile trades designed to screw up the system, e.g. true example is the blanket blog an hour ago from the Chinese. 2. Traders need to become more efficient and adapt to changing times. 3. Trading techniques need to be modified to adapt to Big Brother. 4. Those who really need to trade will do so and survive. 5. It's all about life, and the passion of living, and not screwing. 6. We are all in the same melting pot. 7. Almighty abandoned us a long time ago, may be? 8. The meek shall inherit the Earth.
perhaps you and others could be specific and ta;k about new trade through regulations which are likely to give advantge to the NYSE specialists .
This is another example as to how Hamlet's argument is based on false information, and particularly on misrepresenting the Washington Post article I posted. Hamlet, in his efforts to trivialize the massive corruption at NYSE, says that, according to the Washington Post article, the government's case against NYSE is closed, and that all necessary remedies were applied. "Case closed". The article specifically contradicts this as follows: NYSE settled civil charges brought by the SEC, but SEC civil charges were only one part of the case, not the whole case. NYSE, as of the article's writing, still faces "disciplinary action", which appears to be an SEC administrative procedure adjudicated by the SEC itself, separate and apart from civil charges decided by the civil courts. The article states that the Government, as of the article's writing, also continues to pursue its criminal investigation, not just for the underlying crime of stealing from the public, but also for the institution-wide NYSE conspiracy to cover-up the crime and to protect the criminal racket. Another important fact is that this is only the latest in a series of government actions against NYSE. It is therefore unreasonable to presume, as does Hamlet, that when this case is finished, NYSE will have a clean bill of health. This argument greatly overestimates the effectiveness and efficiency of government efforts against racketeering conspiracies, and it also greatly underestimates the obstacles faced by the government when they try to do the right thing. Another important fact is that our society has been deluged by a tsunami of white collar crime, almost none of which is ever addressed by the government. The fact that the government has actually pursued claims of NYSE criminality is an extraordinary exception to the general rule, demonstrating that it really is an extremely serious problem, even when compared to the general field of white-collar crime.
1. What difference does it make if the money is spent or saved in the US, as the investigating involves the use of the same tax dollars? 2. Will the NASD have a positive effect?
look, nobody is argunin' here that there might or might not be widespread corruption on da nyse and that da specs way of handlin' orders is unfair, but that's somewhat besides da point 'cause, as u are makin it up, it seems that da spec is ALWAYS messin' around with our trades causin' us to become unprofitable or limitin' our profits potentials for every single trade we make. obviously this is not da case otherwise i would take u side and be convinced that electronic mkt is da way to go. but no, all da electronic mkts of well established econs [not growin' ones] are, in one way or another, dominated by bolts and those bolts screw your trades much more than da spec, dumpin' every stock attemptin' to rally and causin' massive spikes to shake every1 on da wrong side to exit their pos. this is a reality; u have to weight the 2 things and see what really is in our best interests, and imho nyse is best if it stays as it is.
This is completely false and a 100% misrepresentation of the facts. White collar crime, particularly at the corporate level, has been a major focus over recent years, the wave of which began to form after the Enron debacle. The proceeding wave of investigations resulted in CEO indictments, congressional hearings and sweeping changes like Sarbanes-Oxley. These actions have gone a long way towards cleaning a lot of houses and putting serious deterrents against corporate scandal and corruption in place. This is 180 degrees from the grossly inaccurate statement Rockford is trying to make. If Eliot Spitzer were reading this thread he would certainly wonder what planet Rockford has been living on these past five years.
I think you are incorrect on several counts. A number of people, are, in fact, arguing in this thread, that the NYSE is not corrupt and handling orders unfairly. The argument as to whether NYSE is corrupt is not beside the point. It is of critical importance, because when we send an order to the specialist, we are entrusting the specialist to act upon our behalf, as our agent, and if he chooses to victimize us, then he will be able to abuse the trust we place in him. Electronic markets avoid this problem by not requiring us to trust counterparties, and by eliminating this opportunity for theft, fraud, and crime. You are also incorrect to say that I have claimed that the specialist victimizes each customer on every single trade. You are exaggerating my argument in order to make it easier to defeat. It is true that to some limited extent, people can manipulate electronic markets in order to trick highly overleveraged or less sophisticated traders to exit their positions, but this is nowhere near as big as the problem at NYSE. The difference is that at NYSE, the theft occurs as a fundamental, inherent part of the basic mechanism of execution. This is not the case in electronic markets. Electronic market participants might trick you into making an unwise trade, but they can't delay, obstruct, or misprice your executions and order cancellations, or otherwise deprive you of a fair execution. Traders, on balance, will be much better off without NYSE, because electronic markets will offer fair executions. Traders who know only how to suck at the specialist's icy cold tit will need to learn how to trade in real markets, which will include massive spikes and fake price moves, but which will offer fair executions. I understand your desire to remain with the devil you know, and your fear of change, and it may very well mean disaster for your particular trading career. Society, however, cannot afford to keep NYSE in place, in order to protect the careers of people who suck at the specialist tit. Society must smash NYSE, because society must be concerned with the general welfare, not just the welfare of people sucking the specialist tit. You made a conscious decision to become dependent upon a corrupt system. You accepted the rewards for that decision, so that when the changes come, you must also accept that those rewards will not be permanent. You must learn anew how to trade once the specialist is gone, and you cannot expect society to hold back progress because progress is counter to your particular interests.
No, this is not correct. The tidal wave of corporate crime has been growing and engulfing our nation and our economy for decades. It is only in the last few years that the problem has grown so obvious that it remains impossible for the media and for the executive and legislative brances to continue ignoring it. Hamlet simply doesn't know anything about the subject. This is why he incorrectly assumes that since he never heard about the corporate crime wave until the Enron scandal, it never existed prior to that time. His suggestion that the government has done anything more than make a dent in the problem of white-collar crime is equally misinformed.