Some one has to start it, Americas default.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/20/news/international/germany.naked.short.ban.consequences.fortune/

that article might explain the historic response of the markets to bans on short selling or at least naked short trades, traditional shorting is a more stable practice ( and the only type of shorting thats even legal in the US as far as I know ) here's another one from Bloomberg this time which might explain it in a bit more detail

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-08/greek-short-ban-won-t-aid-stocks-history-says-chart-o

this one I haven't read yet but skimmed over looking for something that might explain it better than I.

http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/ban-naked-short-selling-won’t-save-euro

 

No, only when I know something is not right, and I need to look up the evidence.

Heaven forbid there is anything wrong on the internet

 

Was I right? I don't see a link to anything. Nice to Know some one is paying attention to what I say.

 

right at least twice today .......

 

Speaking of trolling, I trolled the www and found this alarming piece from Global Research in Canada... www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25967 "Over 1 Million Deaths Annually, 62 Million People With Zero Net Worth, As the Economic Elite Make Off With $46 Trillion" - Is it all about money and the havs and have-not's, as Casey Research in USA follows a similar line... "Is There Enough Money on Earth to Save the Banks?: Jonathan Weil" http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...orld-s-banks-commentary-by-jonathan-weil.html and "It's the dollar, not S&P; and all must have prizes: Chris Powell" at http://www.journalinquirer.com/articles/2011/08/11/chris_powell/doc4e43e9afe9548159527231.txt

 

"if men could become pregnant, abortion would be a Sacrament."

 

i was going to give you some positive rep for this one, but apparently I haven't given enough out to other people since I slammed you for something else.

Or maybe since I complimented you. But I doubt that....

 

And if societies were fair, nurses would earn more than bankers.

 

and politicians.

 

So the consensus is, That bankers, bureaucrats and politicians should earn LESS than Nurses and Teachers, - but you expected that from me, ... no?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-...ading-as-s-p-500-plunged-13-wedbush-says.html - it appears that "high-frequency trading" determines 75% of the action not "legitimate investors" so the collapse and recovery was a fraud of manipulation...

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Goldmans-new-money-machine-rb-3582752116.html?x=0&.v=2 shows more fraudulent market manipulation at the expense of productive enterprises inside USA...

also from Ed Steers email - here http://www.caseyresearch.com/gsd/edition/gold-us-dollarand-greater-depression-doug-casey lots more links to interesting essays and stuff ...
is this from Doug Casey http://talkdigitalnetwork.com/2011/08/gold-dollar-greater-depression/

 

It only seems like a fraud if you don't understand how traders think. Hint: They're nearly all NYers.

 

CatBuilder,
Is that like saying, "I have smoked drugs, but I never inhaled"? or Bill C's other denial?

 

I'll stand my ground, and repeat: people were turned against 'partial birth abortion' as part of a deliberate campaign by abortion opponents to demonize all abortion, by picking out one particular procedure and giving it a horrific name -- just as anti-gun fanatics sought to demonize all legitimate gun owners, by accusing them of wanting criminals to have 'cop-killer bullets.'

In fact, there's an undisputed record of when and where the term 'partial birth abortion' originated. It was conjured up at a meeting in 1995 between attorney Keri Fulmor, Congressman Charles T. Canady (R. Florida) and a lobbyist named Douglas Johnson. It isn't a medical term, and never has been.

The reality is that intact dilation and extraction was a rare procedure to begin with, generally limited to circumstances involving the life or health of a late-term pregnant patient. In fact, in the year 2000 it accounted for less than .17% of all abortions in the country.

So what was the urgent need to ban the procedure? There wasn't any. Outlawing it probably hasn't saved a single baby's life -- all it's done is make a doctor's job harder. A gaggle of posturing politicians decided they knew more about the practice of medicine than doctors do, so now a doctor faced with the need to act has to use procedures that aren't as simple -- or as safe for the woman he's treating.

But hey... if you can't trust lawyers, politicians and lobbyists to practice medicine on your wife and your daughters, who can you trust?

 

I guess my point was that high frequency trading isn't fraud, it's optimized real trading using computers.

There's nothing wrong, illegal, or even fraudulent about it.

IMO, if you (not you personally) can't understand where the market is going to move or can't afford to lose some capital, you shouldn't be playing the game. After all, it's just a game.

Lastly, if you can understand how a NYC native would operate in the market, you will understand the market.

 

which was exactly my point Troy when I tried to point out that also associating a woman's right to choice with things like wife beating and prejudice was a pretty lame argument. The issue of partial birth abortion was apparently decided years ago when it was made illegal ( check the NPR web site I quoted earlier ) so the point is completely irrelevant. A group of cells called a zygote is no different than a fingernail or a sunburn. Every time you touch something your killing cells, walking kills bacteria.

I'd suggest that if someone is opposed to free choice that they live without there own free choices for a while and see how it goes. If abortions were mandatory, everyone would be pro choice. But since the shoe is on the other foot, some folks want to impose there will on others. I always find it interesting who those folks are and what else they believe in that leads them to want to force on others there own moral and ethical values.