Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SEC to temporarily ban short-selling: report
Marketwatch ^ | 9-18-08 | Robert Schroeder

Posted on 09/18/2008 5:36:14 PM PDT by RKBA Democrat

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-127 next last
To: RKBA Democrat

“We’re the goobermint, and we’re here to hep you all.”

“If you bureaucrat dweebs and congress critters want to hep me, then leave me and the friggin stock market the f*ck alone. And BTW, stop nationalizing every damn failing company that comes along.”

Lately the goobermint is like a nasty annoying mother-in-law, who has moved into your house and almost taken over every aspect of you life, and you can’t figure out a way to get her the hell out.


61 posted on 09/18/2008 10:25:41 PM PDT by webschooner (McWhatshisname/Palin 2008 !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SteveAustin

Right. Bush errs and it could cost about $500 Bil when all is said and done. Obama in the WH rubberstamping everything a liberal Democrat controlled Congress sends his way will probably cost $500 Bil per year from then on.

But Obama wants gov’t to be “cool” and he has some celebrity friends.

I’m pissed at Bush, but the alternative looks a hell of a lot worse.


62 posted on 09/18/2008 10:30:40 PM PDT by Harry Wurzbach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Navy Patriot

There is no upside to this. The market and the economy is in crisis and instead of maintaing a free market we are resorting to Socialism. What is happening today would make FDR blush.

As for me I am outraged when our nation nationalizes industry no matter what party is in power.


63 posted on 09/18/2008 10:39:53 PM PDT by trumandogz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: dickmc
It is reasonable that naked shorting should be, and is, illegal, and that law against same ought to be enforced - it is basically a way of counterfeiting stock certificates. But if I have a valid stock certificate borrowed from a holder who permits same, and sell it - what is the problem? One can be confident that the short seller must eventually buy the shares back. But I would be quite happy with a rule that did not permit short selling. It is the sudden change in the rules after people have taken positions that is the problem.

My complaint is that the feds are changing the rules day by day, as they choose, without notice to the market participants (or at least notice to the "little" participants - lots of mysterious recent action can be explained by those "in the know" having acted on early information about changes to be announced to the general public). We have a severely rigged market, being more so by the day. I'm 3/4's of the way out, soon to be 100%. Do not know what to do next, but the "capital" market in this country is so rigged and subject to arbitrary and insider driven rule changes, and almost frequent, hourly 100% drops and/or increases in stock prices with no fundamental change, (see MS today) that one cannot "invest" in it based on rational analysis of the business as presented.

64 posted on 09/18/2008 10:52:36 PM PDT by GregoryFul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: dickmc

WHOLEY $HIT


65 posted on 09/18/2008 11:27:35 PM PDT by Danae (Read my Lipstick: I AM Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Danae

Could you elaborate a bit?


66 posted on 09/18/2008 11:50:51 PM PDT by Straight Vermonter (Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: GregoryFul
It is reasonable that naked shorting should be, and is, illegal, and that law against same ought to be enforced - it is basically a way of counterfeiting stock certificates. But if I have a valid stock certificate borrowed from a holder who permits same, and sell it - what is the problem? One can be confident that the short seller must eventually buy the shares back. But I would be quite happy with a rule that did not permit short selling. It is the sudden change in the rules after people have taken positions that is the problem.

The problem is not with short selling per se. It is with naked short selling where a hedge fund floods the market with more shares than there are legitimate sellers.

First: The settlement isn't till three days later at best and is often by a FTD (Failure To Deliver which is an IOU which simply enters the system as if it was a real share of stock).
Secondly: and in any event, the offering of a flood of naked shorts (which are undetectable as they enter the system, drives the supply of 'sells' up and the price down. Then, of course, if the settlement occurs the missing phantom stock share can be bought for pennies on the dollar.

You might be interested viewing this quicktime speech-slide presentation here which explains this and related matters in detail.

BTW and one of the things that you may not know, is that of the side effects is for some corporations as also explained in the presentation, is there are now so many phantom shares that the overage is numerically more than some close proxy vote numerical differences.

67 posted on 09/18/2008 11:56:06 PM PDT by dickmc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: RKBA Democrat
The new temporary rules (only through October 2nd) forbidding the short selling of 799 financial stocks is at http://www.sec.gov/rules/other/2008/34-58592.pdf.
68 posted on 09/18/2008 11:58:18 PM PDT by snowsislander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul_B

“Good. Now make it permanent.”

Why shouldn’t somebody be able to benefit from a falling stock price if that person discovered the stock to be overpriced?


69 posted on 09/19/2008 12:25:37 AM PDT by cw35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: steve86

Yup VERY Third World


70 posted on 09/19/2008 12:26:37 AM PDT by cw35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: A Strict Constructionist

“To me a NSS is the same as selling my MickeyD franchise to someone without buying it from me first, no risk to you and I loose my business”

Not even close. How is there no risk to the person shorting?


71 posted on 09/19/2008 12:27:47 AM PDT by cw35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter

The book Atlas Shrugged.... Ayn Rand In a nutshell. the machine of the world stops working, Atlas shrugs the world off his shoulders and it devastates everyone but a select few.


72 posted on 09/19/2008 12:39:20 AM PDT by Danae (Read my Lipstick: I AM Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: GregoryFul
Thats whats going to kill us all, we no longer know what ANYTHING is worth. Dollar is gonna just freakin tank after the election. You watch. They (Congress, SEC and assorted Banking organizations) won't be able to prop it up much longer. and then we are ALL toast. Its a matter of time.
73 posted on 09/19/2008 12:43:12 AM PDT by Danae (Read my Lipstick: I AM Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: GregoryFul

“My complaint is that the feds are changing the rules day by day, as they choose, without notice to the market participants (or at least notice to the “little” participants - lots of mysterious recent action can be explained by those “in the know” having acted on early information about changes to be announced to the general public). We have a severely rigged market, being more so by the day.”

You hit the nail on the head. The small investor without the same access to information doesn’t have a way to win in a rigged game. This is a very bad move on top of several other bad moves recently.


74 posted on 09/19/2008 2:14:43 AM PDT by RKBA Democrat (Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

brokers have the shares on hand and borrowable to short legally

point, as long as it’s real money and stocks, short and long should both be options


75 posted on 09/19/2008 3:03:21 AM PDT by Son House (Palin, Has The Left Press Wailing! [MSNBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, New York Times,...])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Brian S. Fitzgerald
"They been trying this for 400 years."

But now the times has finally come.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22end+times+reductionism%22+overtime+collapse 

76 posted on 09/19/2008 3:05:54 AM PDT by VlPu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever
It’s not hyperbolic to describe this as the end of capitalism. Hamilton and Jefferson, two natural enemies, would agree that this is not the nation they founded.

Though FR tends to be more statist/Hamiltonian than I would like, it's remarkable that both sides of such a great debate can be claimed under the FR banner. Yes, the Constitution is great, but also the Anti-Federalist warnings were right, too.

Now, we have a large portion of the population who reject both sides, and all of what the founders set up.

I'm sorry to say that Benjamin Franklin would realize that sun he saw is now setting, and the Republic has not been kept.

77 posted on 09/19/2008 3:38:51 AM PDT by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever
A clip from spiegel online you may find interesting.

The only thing that is certain is that the era of the unbridled free-market economy in the US has passed -- at least for now. The near nationalization of AIG, America's largest insurance company, with an $85 billion cash infusion -- a bill footed by taxpayers -- was a staggering move. The sum is three times as high as the guarantee provided by the Federal Reserve when Bear Stearns was sold to JPMorgan Chase in March.

Why is it any politician, democrat or republican, can't resist spending my money.

78 posted on 09/19/2008 3:49:53 AM PDT by Taggart_D
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Eric Blair 2084

This looks like a move to save Wachovia and Morgan Stanley.


79 posted on 09/19/2008 4:34:40 AM PDT by Doohickey (Wingnut: A small, dense object that spins easily (See: Obama, Barack))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: VlPu

Oi. I can’t argue.


80 posted on 09/19/2008 4:37:19 AM PDT by Danae (Read my Lipstick: I AM Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-127 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson