Generally the SCOTUS majority seems to feel "It's ok if our president does it." when it it comes to most things.
The few times they disagree they let it stand (like tariffs) and allows the government to collect illegal taxes from the people, and then just shrug at the end with "well guess that was wrong"... and the citizens get nothing back.
Does raise the question of whether this also comes with free immunity from prosecution, or whether the NYAG should just pre-emptively say that anyone signing up for this and trading on the results will be prosecuted under NY state law.
Well, maybe information that is for sale on the open market to anybody that's willing to pay is no longer considered 'insider' information? i.e. trader Jane Doe can't complain that trader John Doe has this info - she could have it too if she wanted.
(edit: not defending this, I find it to be deplorable and disgraces the office of president.)
She could only have that info if she has the money to pay for it. In every possible interpretation, this is just discriminating based on wealth. There was no paywall before. Now the rich get direct access to better information and more wealth, everyone else is left in the dust. As if they didn't already have that advantage before.
To me this would be similar to an argument that "one dollar = one vote" is democractic because anyone could hypothetically pay more or just earn more money.
If you want law and policing to work, it needs to be very predictable for everyone. So yes, if there is the least bit of doubt, the NYAG should absolutely say, far in advance, that this will happen.
Because if this isn't the case, then people will be forced to compete by "slightly" violating the law, everyone a little bit more, until the law is a total joke. This has happened in history.
> if the average corporate person does insider trading it comes with a prison sentence not pricing
More like it went from 60 to 100. Laws not applying to very wealthy and connected people is definitely not a new development in the USA. But yes, the trend has been accelerating and become very blatant and in-your-face.
When you get older, eventually you see the pattern. Political parties, whatever their viewpoints, are tolerated as long as they improve economic outcomes fast enough. When that even just slows down, there is some tolerance, but not much.
Literally the reason people voted for Hitler was that the German economy was in the shitter and he promised to fix it, with promises that made no sense, similar to Trump's.
As always, uneducated ignorant people make life hell for everyone else.
In order for a democracy to function, you need people that are able to evaluate political promises as bullshit or not. If you believe nonsense from grifters, you get either what you described or the current US admin. Or Brexit.
I'm sure there are more examples of this in history.
While siphoning the remaining public school funding to private schools [1]:
> ProPublica analyzed data from 13 states of varying sizes that do publish private school directories and offer public funding to these types of schools, and found that at least 1,500 more are listed today than were five years ago — bringing the total to more than 9,600. The numbers provide a rare look into the growth catalyzed by friendly legislatures and government money, while public school districts are losing students and closing schools.
> When public money is available, most private schools take advantage of that funding. In several states, all or nearly all students at some private schools pay tuition with public dollars.
Hitler did create an "economic miracle", which is why he actually went up in popularity, even with the parties he would later ...: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRlbUeji01U
It was all based on a purposefully designed system of lies. Which can work, until someone proves it's a lie to external parties.
I don't know why this is downvoted, this is the entire basis of China being politically stable despite being unfree.
The problem is trying to untangle which are the economic indicators that matter and what the causality is. Despite everything, the stock market is at or near an all time high (mostly due to AI), and that grants Trump a lot of leeway from the money class.
Oil prices going up would probably also be extremely unfavourable for the Trump regime. So simply empty the US SPR onto the market to keep prices down and avoid the Iran war having any impact. Should last for the rest of his term.
The algorithmic trading firms were already doing this via scraping. What I’m curious about is if they’re going to also impose a slight delay between when posts show up in the API vs when they’re posted on the website.
thats math bots reading trades and making best guesses.
probably detremental to the market as a whole but not fundamentally illegal -- they're just watching really, really, really closely.
DJT is selling access to stuff that he knows will move the market, and may only be done just to move the market. wholesale graft, and depending on who benefits, possibly treason.
I mean Congress or SCOTUS could restrict his powers but they don't want to. How do you even go about fixing that? And is it really that uncommon when president, congress and supreme court is controlled by same party?
I have a feeling the only new element is that the same can be now said for media.
It's kind of what happens when an electorate empowers a pathologically lying corrupt criminal to head of state and gives their craven sycophants legislative majorities.
Not sure what "average corporate person" means, but if you're just a random dude and you trade on your golf buddies tips, no one is going to throw you in jail. Very few people get charged a year, like dozens. I'm sure >99.9% of get away with it. I think it's often political or targeted.
The weirdness here comes from the president owning a social media company. I think they're playing up how markets move on their posts for obvious reasons. But social media companies likely sell priority access. They're called enterprise licensing deals. Same with news media, like Bloomberg, Dow, Reuters.
This isn't "insider trading" its publicly available information. The idea that the "little guy" is somehow screwed over by this is just silly.
Remember companies go bankrupt. Slowly then all of the sudden.
We're in a problem that was made by the Bushs, Clintons, Obama & Biden. And Trump. Those who went before them. And of course the voters who put them in power.
The few times they disagree they let it stand (like tariffs) and allows the government to collect illegal taxes from the people, and then just shrug at the end with "well guess that was wrong"... and the citizens get nothing back.