Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Four university researchers examined 16,000 common stock transactions made by approximately 300 House representatives from 1985 to 2001, and found what they call “significant positive abnormal returns,” with portfolios based on congressional trades beating the market by about 6 percent annually.
What’s their secret? The report speculates, but does not conclude, it could have something to do with the ability members of Congress have to trade on non-public information or to vote their own pocketbooks — or both.
A study of senators by the same team of researchers five years ago found members of the higher chamber even better at beating the market — outperforming it by about 10 percent, an amount the academics said was 'both economically large and statistically significant.'"
Lol. Wasn't the original concept of cryptos to get around government involvement completely? An odd position for them to be in, I'd imagine.
That seems to have been part of the goal. It also seems strange. The Constitution gave the US government the sole authority to issue money. I suspect it is getting towards the time when crypto will become clearly illegal.
Lol. Wasn't the original concept of cryptos to get around government involvement completely? An odd position for them to be in, I'd imagine.
Bitcoin has an allure and a corrupting appeal that will be hard to resist.
“...Nearly any government agent who begins to see bitcoin as a potential threat must also simultaneously see it as an opportunity. He, too, can invest in Bitcoin. And why shouldn’t he? Bitcoin may be a threat to his livelihood, but it may well be making him an offer he can’t refuse. How can an organization that stands to lose by the adoption of Bitcoin provide its members with a better opportunity for staying loyal than Bitcoin provides for defection?...”
That seems to have been part of the goal. It also seems strange. The Constitution gave the US government the sole authority to issue money. I suspect it is getting towards the time when crypto will become clearly illegal.
It would have to be a world wide ban, that monitors every single byte on the internet. Encryption itself will have to be outlawed. 1984 for real.
I see bitcoin/cryptocurrencies as an almost unstoppable force. The concepts are out there and can’t be taken back. The software is open source, free for anyone to copy, run, modify. There is no single server or organization that can be targeted. True anonymity layers will become practical and the network will go dark.
This is part of the cypherpunk/cryptoanarchy idea of liberating the world through encryption. The cypherpunks are an interesting group because they don’t believe in just talking about their ideas, they believe in implementing them as software and freely providing them to the world with the motto of “code is law”.
It is very sad -- but very true. Unfortunately, this is not new news.
That is one of the reasons Trump got in -- the public disgust with politicians has reached epidemic levels. Trump has his own issues but at least he isn't a politician. Hillary would clearly have meant more of the same.
This insider trading exemption is criminal and it's a joke.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
