Idiots did not lose homes, because they bought a place to live. "Idiots " stopped buying homes therefore valuations dropped and equities disappeared and equity build up vanished. Homes became undervalued and that started the financial crunch, and credit markets became tight. Its those "idiots " who are sitting on the fence renting one- bedroom apartments and piling up with in- laws while millions of homes in this country go vacant every night. These are the same " idiots "who are tanking our equities market with a prevalent mood of doom and gloom and giving it a fate worse than a recession could have or a calamity could have.
This topic is moot in my opinion. 25K is the barely the minimum that you can day trade with. Even with 4-1 leverage you only have about 100k in buying power and you can only buy about 1000 shares worth of stocks. And if you can't trade at these levels, you can't make money in the long run because commissions will bleed you dry. There is no way to trade with a 5k or 10k account. What are you going to buy? 200 shares of a $50 dollar stock? You percentage wins have to be in the high 70% to make any money! So I think if you can't afford 25k, stay out of the market or play poker.
"Forced"? Please enlighten us as to how you were "forced" into futures. Did "they" come to you one mysterious night and hold a gun to your head? Did "they" threaten your family with certain death if you did not comply with their wishes? How exactly were you "forced"? If a person is unable to swing trade successfully, it's an almost certainty that intra-day trading is completely out of their grasp. Nonetheless, I personally detest big brother telling me, you, or anyone else what to do with their money. However, being many of today's generation were raised by being dipped in sissy sauce and coated with the stupid powder, the resulting endless whimpering these "no one is a loser" T-Ball clowns bestowed upon the regulators whenever they lost their money caused the government to do exactly what approximately 50% of todayâs population wants. That is, to be protected from themselves. As to not confuse you, this is where you tell me how wrong I am, that you were able to amass a small fortune being "forced" to trade futures, and how you had to walk to school 10 miles uphill each way in blinding snow storms. Careful though, you've already claimed that trading just one contract can cause losses of $1000 in just a blink of an eye. As such, your credibility may be in question. Please say hello to Dorothy and Toto for me. st
I don't like the PDT rule simply because I don't have much more then 25k to work with. I can make small gains with small amounts, but if I do not have a significant amount above the min, 1 bad trade can take me under the min, freezing my account. I have reached the stage of trading where I have several weeks of small gains, then wipe it out with 1 or 2 oversized trades. I try to view my risk as only the excess above 25,000. When I do this my size stays small, and I make a little. If I use the entire risk of the account, it's back to the drawing board as my stops get to tight, and I'm stopped out with large enough losses to get me closer to the edge of the account, which then becomes a psychological factor (will the next loss take me out of the game? better up my size and try get some breathing room). Of course, by then, I'm not looking at the charts, I'm looking at my account. I'm not a lucky individual, so the results don't need to be stated here. I believe if I could day trade a much smaller account without the fear of the account being frozen, I would be enjoying a more consistent success rate. I would then be able to keep my risk proportional to my account size, my biggest problem currently. Since I don't have enough money to up my account in a meaningful way, I will continue to view the limits as an obstacle to overcome in my learning curve. Simply follow my size rules, don't get mad, no problem. Break rules, lose money. The SEC will never change the rule. Look how long it took to get rid of the uptick rule. Some brokers like IB fought the PDT rule, stating it would make it difficult for small traders to succeed. I believe a few of the issues that give me trouble would qualify. I think traders could make money more easily with a 5,000 dollar margin account with 4-1 day. I would love to see that. I could then use my capital in several accounts, 1 for swing trading where I wouldn't have to worry about a swing play taking my account under the min. I agree with the comment about swing trading (I have a tiny swing account), but I'm nervous about swings right now (especially in my PDT account). The current market is not friendly to longs, and my bigger concern, if I'm short, the fed or some rumormonger at CNBC can crush me quickly, even with small size. Prefer to go home flat in the current market. It would be interesting to see a stat comparing the daytraders who succeeded because of the current PDT rules against those who failed because of the rules. If I can't raise my PDT account to 30k with my trades by 09, I may give the E Mini's a try in a small account. I track them every day, so not totally unfamiliar with them.
I noticed on your profile page that YOU claim to be a trader. Anyway, just out of curiosity, how long do investors who can't/won't admit we're in a bear market last? You know, just on average.
Did I say that ? Why should I put up 250k to get 1 million when I can put up 25k to do the exact same thing. Not to mention, incredible platforms and fills vs. the children's toys retail traders have to deal with. PROFESSIONAL day traders use prop and kids play with bells and whistles. I used IB for years and HATED every second of it. Shit fills Freezing platforms Ignorant rude customer service. Terrible accounting etc etc..