PELOSI Act - new legislation.

Quote from the movie "Lincoln"
"It isn't illegal to bribe Congressmen, they would starve otherwise"

I guess the PELOSI act was appropriately named.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:Nancy is a great American.. one of the greatest.

And one of the richest!

Zurn wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:Nancy is a great American.. one of the greatest.

And one of the richest!

Nancy can trade whatever stocks she wants because she's on my team, hopefully.

[tw]1753780629240791403?s=20[/tw]

Option trades are high risk & high reward.  You need the mad money to lose to make them.

Have we been seeing this in real time or only after the fact?

Besides, in this case anyone who was paying attention could have seen that there was significate potential in the stock of the leading AI company. AI & Nvidia was bigly in the news in November, when she bought.

How do those boots taste?

Cameron wrote:How do those boots taste?

You must know as you seem all in on the boots of those who attack high level Democratics. /s

And really this one is a stupid attack, as of you were paying attention to the business news you would have made the same trade yourself if you had the money and were playing in stock options.

Seriously, it doesn't take that much in the bank to buy an option on a stock, if you can stomach the risk of losing it all.

There are probably more valid attacks on her, such as her support to allow Congresspeople to buy and sell stocks while she was the Speaker, but she isn't anymore, so if you want to attack the leader of the House for not fixing this that is Mike Johnson.

Trapper Gus wrote:Option trades are high risk & high reward.  You need the mad money to lose to make them.

Have we been seeing this in real time or only after the fact?

Besides, in this case anyone who was paying attention could have seen that there was significate potential in the stock of the leading AI company.  AI & Nvidia was bigly in the news in November, when she bought.

Yeah, they are high risk high reward. If you’re playing by the rules. If you’re not playing by the rules and you know what a stock is going to do it isn’t that risky, it’s more like free money.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Cameron wrote:How do those boots taste?

You must know as you seem all in on the boots of those who attack high level Democratics. /s

And really this one is a stupid attack, as of you were paying attention to the business news you would have made the same trade yourself if you had the money and were playing in stock options.

Seriously, it doesn't take that much in the bank to buy an option on a stock, if you can stomach the risk of losing it all.

There are probably more valid attacks on her, such as her support to allow Congresspeople to buy and sell stocks while she was the Speaker, but she isn't anymore, so if you want to attack the leader of the House for not fixing this that is Mike Johnson.

You think she made her move because she watches cnbc?

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:Option trades are high risk & high reward.  You need the mad money to lose to make them.

Have we been seeing this in real time or only after the fact?

Besides, in this case anyone who was paying attention could have seen that there was significate potential in the stock of the leading AI company.  AI & Nvidia was bigly in the news in November, when she bought.

Yeah, they are high risk high reward. If you’re playing by the rules. If you’re not playing by the rules and you know what a stock is going to do it isn’t that risky, it’s more like free money.

Can someone explain to me line I’m a third grader how these people find out early what a stock will do?

Many of them trade in industries whose committees they sit on. Tommy Tuberville is on some agricultural committees and trades in various ag related stocks, for example.

Report: Tuberville traded stocks in industries with business before Senate

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:Option trades are high risk & high reward.  You need the mad money to lose to make them.




Have we been seeing this in real time or only after the fact?

Besides, in this case anyone who was paying attention could have seen that there was significate potential in the stock of the leading AI company.  AI & Nvidia was bigly in the news in November, when she bought.

Yeah, they are high risk high reward. If you’re playing by the rules. If you’re not playing by the rules and you know what a stock is going to do it isn’t that risky, it’s more like free money.

Oh please. AI has been all over the news for months and Nvidia is the leading company in the AI IC market. An aware 5th grader could have made this bet.

Stock options are strongly regulated, with their own Wall Street market. unlike commodity options, where as far as I know, you are correct that the broker can decide who wins, aka Hillery Clinton & David Purdue in the 1980's.

IMO you guys are falling for a Republician disinformation campaign that has been run against the former Speaker for years & years.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Yeah, they are high risk high reward. If you’re playing by the rules. If you’re not playing by the rules and you know what a stock is going to do it isn’t that risky, it’s more like free money.

Oh please.  AI has been all over the news for months and Nvidia is the leading company in the AI IC market.  An aware 5th grader could have made this bet.

Stock options are strongly regulated, with their own Wall Street market. unlike commodity options, where as far as I know, you are correct that the broker can decide who wins, aka Hillery Clinton & David Purdue in the 1980's.

IMO you guys are falling for a Republician disinformation campaign that has been run against the former Speaker for years & years.

Then it’s not high risk, high reward, is it traps? Now you’re just saying it’s purely high reward.

DWags wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Yeah, they are high risk high reward. If you’re playing by the rules. If you’re not playing by the rules and you know what a stock is going to do it isn’t that risky, it’s more like free money.

Can someone explain to me line I’m a third grader how these people find out early what a stock will do?  

Plus one...

They don't of course.  They just look at the company's products, management and the market and they call up their broker and place a bet, aka an option to buy so many shares at certain price per share by a given date.  Options are sold at a small fraction of the stock price.

Beyond that they can create hedges, of which there are any number.  

The real dodgy thing in this stock option market is that the company selling the option doesn't need to show that it owns the stock at the time the option is sold.  It only has to buy the stock to give to the option holder at the agreed price when the option is exercised.  

Corners in company stocks options can and have been run where there are far more options sold than there is total company stock.  The Leman Bros debacle had some of this going on, and sometimes raiders will start buying options to drive the stock price down.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:


Oh please.  AI has been all over the news for months and Nvidia is the leading company in the AI IC market.  An aware 5th grader could have made this bet.

Stock options are strongly regulated, with their own Wall Street market. unlike commodity options, where as far as I know, you are correct that the broker can decide who wins, aka Hillery Clinton & David Purdue in the 1980's.

IMO you guys are falling for a Republician disinformation campaign that has been run against the former Speaker for years & years.

Then it’s not high risk, high reward, is it traps? Now you’re just saying it’s purely high reward.

The price of the option is the risk for the buyer and the possibility of the stock being above the option price is the risk for the seller of the option, who, as I just posted, is not required to own the stock for which the option was sold on.

For the option buyer the risk is the stock does not go above the option price during the time period the option is for, if so they lose the money they paid to buy the option, 100%.  If they are investing is stocks and options are part of their investments this is a 100% loss of that amount of capital, which no holding onto it longer can make whole.  If they had bought a stock instead and it's value fell they have the choice of holding onto the stock in hopes that its value will go up again.  So options are a higher risk than just buying the stock, and a higher reward because if the stock goes up in the option period  the the option holder can buy & sell the stock at the same time and thus gain the difference in the option call price and the market price for the investment of the option, thus high reward.

I'm very sure I'm not 100% correct, maybe about 90% and that Motown could explain it correctly.

Trapper Gus wrote:Option trades are high risk & high reward.  You need the mad money to lose to make them.

Have we been seeing this in real time or only after the fact?

Besides, in this case anyone who was paying attention could have seen that there was significate potential in the stock of the leading AI company.  AI & Nvidia was bigly in the news in November, when she bought.

FapperGus: NSFW  https://mrdeepfakes.com/search/nancy-pelosi

You're welcome

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:Option trades are high risk & high reward.  You need the mad money to lose to make them.

Have we been seeing this in real time or only after the fact?

Besides, in this case anyone who was paying attention could have seen that there was significate potential in the stock of the leading AI company.  AI & Nvidia was bigly in the news in November, when she bought.

FapperGus:   https://mrdeepfakes.com/search/nancy-pelosi

You're welcome

Dude, please...

That needs a don't open at the office warning.

BTW the difference between stock options and commodity options is that the commodity markets are run on commodity contracts: so many bushels of corn at a set price, so many at a price 5 cents less and so on.

The commodity dealer can pick and chose whose option is awarded which contract, thus choosing who wins.

Trapper Gus wrote:

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

FapperGus:   https://mrdeepfakes.com/search/nancy-pelosi

You're welcome

Dude, please...

That needs a don't open at the office warning.

That's not a thank you

Trapper Gus wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Then it’s not high risk, high reward, is it traps? Now you’re just saying it’s purely high reward.

The price of the option is the risk for the buyer and the possibility of the stock being above the option price is the risk for the seller of the option, who, as I just posted, is not required to own the stock for which the option was sold on.

For the option buyer the risk is the stock does not go above the option price during the time period the option is for, if so they lose the money they paid to buy the option, 100%.  If they are investing is stocks and options are part of their investments this is a 100% loss of that amount of capital, which no holding onto it longer can make whole.  If they had bought a stock instead and it's value fell they have the choice of holding onto the stock in hopes that its value will go up again.  So options are a higher risk than just buying the stock, and a higher reward because if the stock goes up in the option period  the the option holder can buy & sell the stock at the same time and thus gain the difference in the option call price and the market price for the investment of the option, thus high reward.

I'm very sure I'm not 100% correct, maybe about 90% and that Motown could explain it correctly.

You should start with the “I don’t know what I’m talking about” instead of hiding it at the end

DWags wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Yeah, they are high risk high reward. If you’re playing by the rules. If you’re not playing by the rules and you know what a stock is going to do it isn’t that risky, it’s more like free money.

Can someone explain to me line I’m a third grader how these people find out early what a stock will do?  

The most obvious example is in February 2020 when a whole bunch of politicians, who knew that covid was worse than the media and the politicians themselves were letting on, bought a whole bunch of stock in things like zoom.

It’s insider trading. When they are trading on the basis of material information that is not public. It happens a lot in corporate America. It’s also very difficult to prove. Especially for politicians when you have dopey shills that will excuse anything someone with a d next to their name does because they are perfect specimens who are above criticism.

Anyway. Pay politicians 5 million a year but ban them from ever owning stock ever again for at least 10-15 years after they leave office. Maybe let them have like index funds and maybe limit their number of trades even with those. Bribe them ourselves so that no one else needs to. Them making a middle class wage is absurd and ensures that our best aren’t those that are leading us.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

The price of the option is the risk for the buyer and the possibility of the stock being above the option price is the risk for the seller of the option, who, as I just posted, is not required to own the stock for which the option was sold on.

For the option buyer the risk is the stock does not go above the option price during the time period the option is for, if so they lose the money they paid to buy the option, 100%.  If they are investing is stocks and options are part of their investments this is a 100% loss of that amount of capital, which no holding onto it longer can make whole.  If they had bought a stock instead and it's value fell they have the choice of holding onto the stock in hopes that its value will go up again.  So options are a higher risk than just buying the stock, and a higher reward because if the stock goes up in the option period  the the option holder can buy & sell the stock at the same time and thus gain the difference in the option call price and the market price for the investment of the option, thus high reward.

I'm very sure I'm not 100% correct, maybe about 90% and that Motown could explain it correctly.

You should start with the “I don’t know what I’m talking about” instead of hiding it at the end

If that were the case I would have.  There are tons of nuance as to all the games that can be played in the market, but not by private citizens buying options.  That explanation is 99% correct.  Basic options work as I described.

One of my favorites is the buy low and sell just a bit higher in seconds, well microseconds, that some brokers do in between the time that retail customers enters a buy order and the order is filled. Thus the retail customer pays a slightly higher price and the buy & sell broker pockets the difference.

AvgMSUJoe wrote:If you're on X committee and you know the bill to fund Y will be in the funding for the next year. (Building a new factory, weapon systems, agriculture, pharma or state department and knowing about all of that anywhere in the worrld....)

I'm sure Pelosi was informed before the general public that Nvidia was in the lead for making the chips used in AI. (Via committee looking into licensing or regulation of some sort...)

No.

Nvidia has been a leader in AI for years.

Nancy bought an option in November 2023.

Here is a link to a CNBC article from March 2023.


https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/07/nvidia-grew-from-gaming-to-ai-giant-and-now-powering-chatgpt.html



It wasn't some sort of secret they are a cutting edge company in AI or that (in November 2023) that AI is the next big thing.

In this case it was just smart investing by someone who could, because she has enough money that brokers will let her play in higher risk markets.

Now the covid thing, where Senators & Representatives  were given a closed door briefing and then made stock plays stinks.

In cases where the hearings are public, and the Senators & Representatives receive the information at the same time as the public, it still reaks just because the information is more easily available to them, but, since the public knows at the same time it is not insider trading.

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

Dude, please...

That needs a don't open at the office warning.

That's not a thank you

Okay, whatever your intentions it is rude to post a link to porn. More so with no warning.

My first response was me being polite and warning others who might be thinking of clicking that porn link.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

DWags wrote:


Can someone explain to me line I’m a third grader how these people find out early what a stock will do?  

The most obvious example is in February 2020 when a whole bunch of politicians, who knew that covid was worse than the media and the politicians themselves were letting on, bought a whole bunch of stock in things like zoom.

It’s insider trading. When they are trading on the basis of material information that is not public. It happens a lot in corporate America. It’s also very difficult to prove. Especially for politicians when you have dopey shills that will excuse anything someone with a d next to their name does because they are perfect specimens who are above criticism.

By the way pelosi thinks this is all fine and should be allowed despite the, you know, existing laws on the matter.

https://sports.yahoo.com/nancy-pelosi-defends-lawmakers-rich-170643326.html

Gosh I wonder why people don’t trust her in this topic it must be disinformation traps amirite?? She couldn’t possibly just be untrustworthy slimy scum could she

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
The most obvious example is in February 2020 when a whole bunch of politicians, who knew that covid was worse than the media and the politicians themselves were letting on, bought a whole bunch of stock in things like zoom.

It’s insider trading. When they are trading on the basis of material information that is not public. It happens a lot in corporate America. It’s also very difficult to prove. Especially for politicians when you have dopey shills that will excuse anything someone with a d next to their name does because they are perfect specimens who are above criticism.

By the way pelosi thinks this is all fine and should be allowed despite the, you know, existing laws on the matter.

https://sports.yahoo.com/nancy-pelosi-defends-lawmakers-rich-170643326.html

Gosh I wonder why people don’t trust her in this topic it must be disinformation traps amirite?? She couldn’t possibly just be untrustworthy slimy scum could she

The article insinuates insider trading without showing any examples to support that.  So FWIW the article is disinformation.

While the reporting source could have done the hard work to provide some evidence of insider trading, instead they chose not to, thus providing cover for all the trades the Senators & Representatives did make, possibly with only public information, although they likely were in the room when it was publicly revealed, and thus had the advantage of being in the right place at the right time to take immediate, which also was not shown by the article, action.

Yellow journalism at its finest, and we are not well informed but still are outraged about something not shown to have happened.

Nancy is correct that Congresspeople need not be economic monks with public information, and insider trading is already not allowed.

FWIW some of the covid trades were investigated and the Senators involved were deemed to have not broken the rules.

Such a fucking bootlicker. It's pathetic.

Cameron wrote:Such a fucking bootlicker. It's pathetic.

Yes you are.  You are so easily bamboozled by people writing mindless articles and your emotional reactions to them.

Really attending a university was supposed to provide you with the tools to read an article and deconstruct it to separate the facts it provided verses the facts it didn't provide which are also part of reality.  Somehow too many people didn't obtain that knowlrdge.

I mean I get that in this internet age you want all the information to fit in one paragraph, but if you want to use reality to form your opinions, well reality takes pages and pages, not a paragraph or three.

I wonder what her husband does for a living.

https://investorplace.com/2024/02/nvda-stock-forecast-why-nvidia-could-be-a-2-trillion-company-in-2024/

I wonder of it would be smart to buy an option on their shares? /s