Go do day trading futures or options. Start with $10k account. Let it grow to $20k, $100k, $1000k And beyond
If only the government gave out free money for people to trade!! Wait, they did... I wonder what happened?? https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made...stors-lose-big-options-markets-research-shows
You can approximate a same day buy and sell of options that skirts the PDT rule by buying an option and then selling the option at the closest strike price on the chain. For example if you bought the 500 strike SPY call expiring March 15th and you wanted to close it out 2 hours later, rather than simply selling it and getting a PDT flag, you could instead sell the 501 strike SPY call giving you most of the effect of closing your original 500 strike option but without triggering the PDT rule. Next day at open you close them both. Obviously if you do the same thing but go very deep in the money it will isolate you from the effects of volatility and time decay making it similar to buying and selling the outright stock. This technique isn't universally applicable, e.g. it's less useful for 0DTE strategies or shorting penny stocks since those don't typically have options, but it's worth considering when it can help.
But this method does not help when one has to do an immediate close, ie. in real emergency situations... :-( And this fact clearly shows and proves that the PDT rule is not for protecting the trader, but exactly the opposite: to harm the trader, to force him/her to make losses by accepting and obeying and bowing to the dictat of this PDT shaet rule by SEC or whoever brought it. Here is a better solution: the settlement time already implicitly solves it! Ie. prevents a trader from making countless daytrades b/c the proceeds from sales has first to be settled before it can be re-used (and this settlement happens at T+1 or T+2, as we all know). This is the current situation in CashAccount, but one can apply a modification of it also for MarginAcct. So, this shows that there is in fact really no need for this dumb PDT rule.
It seems like the rules deter people from starting to become pattern day traders to begin with. Eyes wide open when you read the disclosures right?? You said in your application that you had extensive experience in day trading correct (including margins)? Were you telling the truth...You didn't understand the rules (that has been on the books for over 20 years)!! The World Series of Poker has a $10,000. buy in (yeah, I know it can be cheaper to try and get in the big game). But they don't want to deal with little people who've won $6,000. at the local poker room. They would say "put up or shut up"... Any idea why the government would harass day traders, who make tons of trades (on margin)?? They have seen the outcome... Get your stack (at least $50,000. to be safe) and go for it. Not rocket science...
2 ways to get around the problem of the PDT rule; If you only want to trade stocks, swing trade. The only time you take a day trade is when your stop gets hit the same day as you open the trade. Trade futures, I don't know anything about them but apparently the mini's can be successfully traded with a small account. Trade a cash account and live with the settlement time.
My IRA account is similar like someone without PDT since it is a cash account so I do pseudo daytrading via options and ft the signals tell me to reverse I just buy the opposite position on my options until I can sell them both the next day. I remember I was long calls on MRNA right before it got put in the S&P 500 and I was up like $20K on that call but since I bought it the same day I just bought enough puts to cover if it went down the day. I was right it opened down like 5%. It actually came back so I made $10K in the end. I have reversal signals on Fed day all the time but I dont trade on those days. People seem to change their mind all the time on what JPow meant in his opaque speeches. I believe was PDT was a reaction to the rampant speculation in the 1999-2000 NASDAQ markets. When people were daytrading and they were leveraged to the max and their trade went against them the brokers were the ones who took the hit. I mean that's why IBKR has such high margins -- so they don't go belly up. The same thing happened after the 1929 crash. I believe you could get 10:1 leverage before the 1931 and 1932 SEC reform acts. They reduced it to 2:1 for the retail traders. I think that's one of the reasons that Jesse Livermore never really had great success again.
The premise of this thread is wrong and backwards. OP asserts that the PDT rule prevents active trading by small accounts and as such lets only wealthier people realize the alleged benefits of active trading, thereby increasing the wealth gap. In reality, 95%+ of retail traders lose, and studies show that greater trading frequency correlates with greater losses. If anything, the PDT rule makes the wealth gap narrower than it would otherwise be.