If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Forbes)   The mythical crime of "insider trading" should really be called "freedom trading"   (forbes.com) divider line 154
    More: Amusing, political freedom, Mises, trade, Spitzer  
•       •       •

1748 clicks; posted to Politics » on 18 Sep 2013 at 1:29 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



154 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-18 10:48:37 AM
"SAC Capital's founder, Steven A. Cohen, is being tried as a witch..."

Well, does he weigh more than a duck?
 
2013-09-18 10:51:29 AM
Forbes is like Kool-Aid for the 1%.
 
2013-09-18 10:55:05 AM
Randian Objectivism is a broken and pretty stupid philosophy.

/Harry Binswanger is a cock
 
2013-09-18 11:12:08 AM
This guy is really going for it today isn't he?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-09-18 11:39:54 AM
It's almost like this is a guy with an antisocial personality disorder than an economic theory.  i have heard interviews with criminals where they describe their viewpoint and it's very similar.
 
2013-09-18 11:41:30 AM

vpb: It's almost like this is a guy with an antisocial personality disorder than an economic theory.  i have heard interviews with criminals where they describe their viewpoint and it's very similar.


I don't think I've ever met anyone in my life whose world view was entirely informed by a single work of literature that didn't have a personality disorder.

Those two things go hand-in-hand.
 
2013-09-18 12:56:50 PM

Slaxl: This guy is really going for it today isn't he?


A comment and a question:

Whoever keeps submitting this Forbes crap has stumbled on green-light gold. Well done.

Is Binswanger a real name? It sounds made up. If I was going to create an alt designed to be a total dick, it's a name I might choose.
 
2013-09-18 01:16:35 PM
Between this and the other article, I can only assume that this dick's idea of competition is preventing anyone from joining the game.  If you're in the game, you've already de facto won.
 
2013-09-18 01:28:29 PM
This guy cannot be real, right? I mean you can't write this:

"Take a worst case scenario: a fire has just broken out in one of the firm's warehouses. Insiders start dumping their stock, selling it to hapless, ignorant outsiders who are about to see their newly bought stock plunge in price. But what is the cause of the stock's fall? The cause is not insider trading, but the fire."

And actually mean it. Because that's not even close to the worst case scenario. An obviously worse scenario is a bunch of CEOs shorting their own stock because they have direct control over whether their stock tanks, making a killing by destroying their own company, and walking away. The company is decimated not by accident, not by random act like fire, but because greedy people actively destroyed it for their own gain, putting hard working people out of work. And I'm pretty sure even that's not a worst case scenario, but I didn't want to spend more than a minute on this ridiculous human being.
 
2013-09-18 01:31:41 PM
It is things like this that makes me want to go "eat the rich."

The "job creators" may be good at making money, but not much else.
 
2013-09-18 01:32:36 PM
Wow...this guy made it to supreme douchebag in a single day.
WTF is wrong with you Forbes?
 
2013-09-18 01:32:54 PM
So.... lemme get the argument straight.  So long as the 'hapless outsider' is bilked and the 'upstanding insider' makes a delightful chunk of change, all is right with the world?
 
2013-09-18 01:33:23 PM
I'm totally shocked to find out he's an Objectivist nutball.
 
2013-09-18 01:33:56 PM
This clown needs to get fark-shamed into a notoriety level akin to Romero.
 
2013-09-18 01:34:09 PM
This guy again.

Previously from this author: The Big Lie: Intelligence Failure in Iraq

Amongst his main points are, I sh*t you not:

4. What is the evidence for any failure?

5. If there was some failure in intelligence-so what?

6. Intelligence? Why did we need intelligence?
 
2013-09-18 01:34:48 PM

Cinaed: So.... lemme get the argument straight.  So long as the 'hapless outsider' is bilked and the 'upstanding insider' makes a delightful chunk of change, all is right with the world?


Those who cry for fairness are just envious of the cheaters.
 
2013-09-18 01:36:00 PM

HighOnCraic: "SAC Capital's founder, Steven A. Cohen, is being tried as a witch..."

Well, does he weigh more than a duck?


See if he floats. His office is right on the Long Island Sound.
 
2013-09-18 01:36:49 PM

Cinaed: So.... lemme get the argument straight.  So long as the 'hapless outsider' is bilked and the 'upstanding insider' makes a delightful chunk of change, all is right with the world?


Yup that should totally bring back confidence in the market.
 
2013-09-18 01:36:52 PM
Yes, socialist revolutions have led to the questionable "achievement" of everyone being equally miserable - or "shabby" as this author quoted it. But maybe it's time for the people at the top of this new Gilded Age pyramid we've built to ask themselves what on Earth would lead vast numbers of the bottom-dwelling people to smash everything just to be as shabby as the next guy.

Maybe they should think about what sort of outrages can be inflicted on people who have less, and to what extent, before those people decide it's worth it to be miserable (some of them are already pretty miserable, anyway) just to wipe the self-satisfied smirk off of the faces of the Forbes crowd.
 
2013-09-18 01:36:55 PM

nmrsnr: This guy cannot be real, right? I mean you can't write this:

"Take a worst case scenario: a fire has just broken out in one of the firm's warehouses. Insiders start dumping their stock, selling it to hapless, ignorant outsiders who are about to see their newly bought stock plunge in price. But what is the cause of the stock's fall? The cause is not insider trading, but the fire."

And actually mean it. Because that's not even close to the worst case scenario. An obviously worse scenario is a bunch of CEOs shorting their own stock because they have direct control over whether their stock tanks, making a killing by destroying their own company, and walking away. The company is decimated not by accident, not by random act like fire, but because greedy people actively destroyed it for their own gain, putting hard working people out of work. And I'm pretty sure even that's not a worst case scenario, but I didn't want to spend more than a minute on this ridiculous human being.


B-b-but nobody would ever do that because free market. Says so right here in Dianetics -er I mean Atlas Shrugged.
 
2013-09-18 01:38:18 PM
FTA:
"(Actual fraud is, of course, a violation of rights, and any fraudulent statements by the company or other insiders would make them legally liable. But this, too, is something for the courts, not regulators.)
"Take a worst case scenario: a fire has just broken out in one of the firm's warehouses. Insiders start dumping their stock, selling it to hapless, ignorant outsiders who are about to see their newly bought stock plunge in price."
Actual fraud is what regulators exist to prevent. Cheating is rampant, especially with invisible and "victimless" crime of insider trading, and would be more so without some regulation.

Worst case scenario? Is that the worst case he can dream up?

Here are a few that are much, much worse.

http://www.businessinsider.com/worst-insider-trading-scandals-2 011-11? op=1
 
2013-09-18 01:38:30 PM
How did we get saddled with this knob twice in one day, dammit?

BTW, did anyone read the derp this time?
 
2013-09-18 01:38:53 PM

Voiceofreason01: Randian Objectivism is a broken and pretty stupid philosophy....


If they'd just go ahead and accept the part about religion being total bullshiat, I could deal with them.

But every Randian is also a Prosperity Gospel "Christian."
 
2013-09-18 01:40:38 PM
This is one of the most sociopathic rationalizations of criminal behavior I've ever seen, and I've read a lot of IBD and WSJ op-eds.

He destroys his own argument in the last sentence -

Bear that in mind the next time you hear someone damn any capitalistic act between consenting adults-including insider trading.

An inherent element of a fraudulent transaction is the concealment or omission of critical information about the transaction.  If you'd known what I knew, you might not have consented to the transaction.

He's saying, if I can cheat you, then you deserve to get cheated.
 
2013-09-18 01:40:47 PM
Take a worst case scenario: a fire has just broken out in one of the firm's warehouses. Insiders start dumping their stock, selling it to hapless, ignorant outsiders who are about to see their newly bought stock plunge in price.
But what is the cause of the stock's fall? The cause is not insider trading, but the fire. The cause is the economic facts: the firm's actual losses, not someone's early knowledge of it. It wouldn't have done the buyer the slightest good to have bought the stock from someone ignorant of the fire-the stock is going to plunge in any case. The buyer's problem has nothing to do with the state of mind of the person he buys from.


I literally cannot believe someone had the gall to write that in a major publication, unironicaly.
 
2013-09-18 01:40:59 PM

sigdiamond2000: vpb: It's almost like this is a guy with an antisocial personality disorder than an economic theory.  i have heard interviews with criminals where they describe their viewpoint and it's very similar.

I don't think I've ever met anyone in my life whose world view was entirely informed by a single work of literature that didn't have a personality disorder.

Those two things go hand-in-hand.


So you're saying that most Christians have a personality disorder? In fact, that could be said of most religious people, no matter their faith.

I can get behind that.
 
2013-09-18 01:43:27 PM
 Harry Binswanger, Contributor  I defend laissez-faire capitalism, using Ayn Rand's Objectivism.

stoppedreadingrightthere.png
 
2013-09-18 01:43:35 PM
The author of that article sounds guilty.  I bet if you spend 5 minutes looking at his trades you could find a couple felonies.
 
2013-09-18 01:45:11 PM
God, is it Binswanger Day on Fark?

JENNIFER GOVERNMENT WAS NOT AN INSTRUCTION MANUAL
 
2013-09-18 01:45:12 PM
The point is anyone can work off insider trading.  I can short McDonalds stock and then put cyanide in their ground beef - its not the stocks fault, its the people who ate the poison.  If anyone dies, so what.

/what a horrible worldview to hold
 
2013-09-18 01:46:08 PM
Oh God, there's even more by the guy to the right. Third on his clickthrough rankings is "Global Warming: Was It Just A Beautiful Dream After All?"
 
2013-09-18 01:47:20 PM
I didn't get past this: I defend laissez-faire capitalism, using Ayn Rand's Objectivism.

Does anyone have a summary that won't make my IQ go down too many points?
 
2013-09-18 01:47:28 PM

MrBallou: Is Binswanger a real name? It sounds made up. If I was going to create an alt designed to be a total dick, it's a name I might choose.


I don't know, didn't he do a few scenes with Asia Carrera?
 
2013-09-18 01:47:35 PM

El Pachuco: This is one of the most sociopathic rationalizations of criminal behavior I've ever seen, and I've read a lot of IBD and WSJ op-eds.

He destroys his own argument in the last sentence -

Bear that in mind the next time you hear someone damn any capitalistic act between consenting adults-including insider trading.

An inherent element of a fraudulent transaction is the concealment or omission of critical information about the transaction.  If you'd known what I knew, you might not have consented to the transaction.

He's saying, if I can cheat you, then you deserve to get cheated.


I took it as a jab(a poorly thought out one) at gay rights groups, or an attempt to co-opt one of their mantras.

That being said, I got as far as

"The hostility toward insider trading is based not on any legal consideration but on a vicious perversion of morality: egalitarianism-the same twisted, envy-ridden idea of morality our President is now promulgating in speeches around the nation."

So thinking everyone should have equal rights and stuff is being envious? I thought it was one of the ideas America was founded on? WHY DOES HE HATE AMERICA?

/oh, and your blog sucks
 
2013-09-18 01:47:50 PM
TWO greenlights for this pile of sentient dog feces.

All you need to know about this guy, right here:

Binswanger has been described as an "orthodox" Objectivist for his commitment to the ideas of his mentor, Ayn Rand, whom Binswanger considers a "once in a millennium genius."
 
2013-09-18 01:48:30 PM
didn't know Forbes had a satirical section.
 
2013-09-18 01:48:46 PM

Marcus Aurelius: Forbes is like Kool-Aid for the 1%.


Forbes is Koo-Aid for "the 53%".

I've gotten to where I'm told about layoffs before they happen and numbers before they're released.  I see the stock move accordingly.  A lot of people insider trade.
 
m00
2013-09-18 01:49:07 PM

nmrsnr: The company is decimated

...

it's reduced by by a tenth?
 
2013-09-18 01:49:12 PM

rustypouch: sigdiamond2000: vpb: It's almost like this is a guy with an antisocial personality disorder than an economic theory.  i have heard interviews with criminals where they describe their viewpoint and it's very similar.

I don't think I've ever met anyone in my life whose world view was entirely informed by a single work of literature that didn't have a personality disorder.

Those two things go hand-in-hand.

So you're saying that most Christians have a personality disorder? In fact, that could be said of most religious people, no matter their faith.

I can get behind that.


If they reject anything that isn't in the Bible. Or, even perhaps more strictly, rejects anything that is outside their own Religion Tradition's interpretation of their holy work (IE, some Protestant-derived Christians denying Catholics are Christian. Almost got sent to detention in highschool over that argument with the teacher).

It's one thing to read the Bible and believe and follow Christianity, it's another to keep your worldview limited to just that and treat all others with hostility, derision, and hatred.
 
2013-09-18 01:49:23 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: 6. Intelligence? Why did we need intelligence?


There's another joke right there about his Randian philosophy, it's just not coming to me right now.
 
2013-09-18 01:49:58 PM
i215.photobucket.com

Approves
 
2013-09-18 01:50:21 PM

rev. dave: The author of that article sounds guilty.  I bet if you spend 5 minutes looking at his trades you could find a couple felonies.


It's not a crime if you assert that it is your "right". Any statement to the contrary just means that you don't love America.

Unless that right is the right to be able to marry who you want to. That is still regulated for your own good.

theknuckler_33: Harry Binswanger, Contributor  I defend laissez-faire capitalism, using Ayn Rand's Objectivism.

stoppedreadingrightthere.png



www.gravatar.com 
Hell, I stopped when I saw it was the same moron from the other thread. Didn't even need to get to his name, the pic was enough.
 
2013-09-18 01:51:24 PM
So, trading stocks isn't a right. Does he then have a problem with not allowing anyone making more than $50 thousand a year to do it? It's not a right after all, and poorer folks are the ones who most need a way to get some cash by laying some money out on companies and then going to their day job.

Of course I'm being ridiculous, but if I have to justify trying to ensure that nobody fixes the game, then he gets to justify letting anyone play at all.
 
2013-09-18 01:53:30 PM

El Pachuco: This is one of the most sociopathic rationalizations of criminal behavior I've ever seen, and I've read a lot of IBD and WSJ op-eds.

He destroys his own argument in the last sentence -

Bear that in mind the next time you hear someone damn any capitalistic act between consenting adults-including insider trading.

An inherent element of a fraudulent transaction is the concealment or omission of critical information about the transaction.  If you'd known what I knew, you might not have consented to the transaction.

He's saying, if I can cheat you, then you deserve to get cheated.


You didn't know?  It's totally -not- rape to have sex with a woman after feeding her a roofied drink!
 
2013-09-18 01:53:57 PM
Look, could someone just mix me a Harvey Wallbanger and stop with the Binswanger already?
 
2013-09-18 01:54:42 PM
is he saying that if a corporate officer pulls an insider trading trick that nets him huge amounts of mone at the expense of the shareholders losing all of their investment, the only way to recover the money is through the courts fighting against a person with HUGE amounts of money, and in the courts that have been stacked in favor of the very rich?

or.

invest in my corporation is the same as giving me money.  cut out the middle man.
 
2013-09-18 01:55:02 PM

Slam Bradley: The point is anyone can work off insider trading.  I can short McDonalds stock and then put cyanide in their ground beef - its not the stocks fault, its the people who ate the poison.  If anyone dies, so what.

/what a horrible worldview to hold


This was the plot to Casino Royale (the Craig version).  The bad guy was going to make the stock in an airline manufacturer tank by blowing up the prototype of their latest jetliner, and he was going to make a bundle by shorting the stock before it happened (using other people's money).  Bond stopped the bomb, which caused the bad guy to lose a ton, and the people who's money he used would kill him if they found out, so the bad guy tried to win it back in a high stakes poker game.
 
2013-09-18 01:56:55 PM
Came into this thread to say "shut up Forbes Magazine you shameless cocks".

TomMalory: [i215.photobucket.com image 320x240]

Approves


Right now he's on my wallpaper with the text "Disregard females. Acquire Profit."
 
2013-09-18 01:57:18 PM
But what is the cause of the stock's fall? The cause is not insider trading, but the fire. The cause is the economic facts: the firm's actual losses, not someone's early knowledge of it. It wouldn't have done the buyer the slightest good to have bought the stock from someone ignorant of the fire-the stock is going to plunge in any case. The buyer's problem has nothing to do with the state of mind of the person he buys from.

It wouldn't have changed things for the buyer whether he bough from someone who knew about the fire or from someone who didn't.
But it would have changed things for the sellers to know about it.  If the company hides the knowledge of the fire from stockholders until after all the CEO's have unloaded the now worthless stock, then they're farking over the stockholders.
 
2013-09-18 01:57:39 PM
I have a theory. This guy is really on the opposing team and is writing as ridiculously as he can for effect. He will come out in a few weeks with a GOTCHA!
 
Displayed 50 of 154 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report