Posts: 63
Threads: 63
Joined: Sep 2017
Reputation:
0
From early knowledge of the covid spread, the companies affected, the opportunity to make or protect money, should not only be punished but given sentences of much worse? I am thinking hang . . . 30 years in federal prison.
Scumbags are bipartisan. They benefited together, they should fall together.
When does the rioting start. . . And no I DO NOT MEAN THOSE “2nd AMENDMENT LOVING ZOMBIES” making their voices heard (and germs spread) on the steps of the capitol building in Michigan
I dont like it, but insider trading in DC has been happening for as long as there has been publicly traded stocks and commodities. outrage now would be naive.
I do enjoy seeing Darwinism in action.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
I dont like it, but insider trading in DC has been happening for as long as there has been publicly traded stocks and commodities. outrage now would be naive.
Insider trading and this are not the same. It’s considerably worse, especially considering that there will be citizens in those Congressional districts who will die because of this.
America is a dumpster fire
Quote: @Skodin said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
I dont like it, but insider trading in DC has been happening for as long as there has been publicly traded stocks and commodities. outrage now would be naive.
Insider trading and this are not the same. It’s considerably worse, especially considering that there will be citizens in those Congressional districts who will die because of this.
America is a dumpster fire
it absolutely is the same thing... how is it not? somebody profits from information they received in a classified position by using it to make investment moves.... insider trading plain and simple the rest is just fluff to make you think this is somehow different.
I believe that insider trading associated with a virus that is going to kill thousands, potentially millions, destroy the economy, and consolidating power for those who have it is a tad bit different than Martha Stewart’s actions.
Yes, they are both wrong, but one is significantly worse than the other. Especially considering these are elected officials who by law are to work for us
Before handing all of them, I'd like more information. If 3M stock (for example) suddenly skyrockets... and Amy Klobuchar happened to have stock in 3M (because she's a good Minnesotan): won't she be making money off this? If this example isn't what you're talking about, then you might need to give more details about what you're concerns are. But, in the scenario I suggested, I wouldn't have a problem with her "making money", simply because her stock went up.
I wonder if the reticence to accept Jimmy's proposition is because there is someone specific that the OP has in mind...?
How would we know, financial records are not available for review, correct?
Quote: @Skodin said:
I believe that insider trading associated with a virus that is going to kill thousands, potentially millions, destroy the economy, and consolidating power for those who have it is a tad bit different than Martha Stewart’s actions.
Yes, they are both wrong, but one is significantly worse than the other. Especially considering these are elected officials who by law are to work for us
the deaths have nothing to do with their act, those people were likely to die from the virus regardless of their insider moves. as far as martha... she has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation since your original topic was " Congressional Members" like i said, this has happened for decades and this time was no different than any time every other congress person acted on non public information.
as a person that lost a lot in the recent crash, i sure wish i had the same warnings, but i wish I had gotten the same info all those others had all those other times as well.
plenty of bad shit in the world to rage about, this aint one of them IMO.
I am more pissed at the WHO and China for covering up the actual situation as long as they did, but that doesnt seem to be as big a deal to others as it is to me.
Quote: @pumpf said:
Before handing all of them, I'd like more information. If 3M stock (for example) suddenly skyrockets... and Amy Klobuchar happened to have stock in 3M (because she's a good Minnesotan): won't she be making money off this? If this example isn't what you're talking about, then you might need to give more details about what you're concerns are. But, in the scenario I suggested, I wouldn't have a problem with her "making money", simply because her stock went up.
I wonder if the reticence to accept Jimmy's proposition is because there is someone specific that the OP has in mind...?
If Klobachar had no money in 3M, had a meeting with US officials about which companies were going to be producing/receiving government contracts, and then purchase 3M stock ahead of time, that’s a party foul. It’s egregious. It is disgusting.
If Amy had money in 3M before this, that’s a different story. One that should considered for debate. A ban on trading stocks should have been and should be in place to avoid conflicts of interest. Holding your investments in a blind trust is an option or middle ground
The two cases that stick out like sore thumbs would be Senator Richard Burr and Senator Kelly Loeffler, personally benefitting or better yet disaster profiteering.
It seems that America is in a constant political party us versus them, it would make sense that we could all agree that the real us vs them is the people versus the people who we have put into office.
|
