Replies

As you look at the shares of stock that shot up fast late in the day, we find lots of them with very large short positions. Hmmm, perhaps they are very stinky companines. Yup, change the rules in the middle of the game, you’ll affect the current score. But, the current market participants will start to vanish cause they cannot figure out how to actually win.

If by 'current market participants' you mean: the hedge fund naked short sellers, the Jim Cramer's, and the Gary Weiss's, I'd rather do without them. There is no way an ordinary investor can beat the manipulators gaming the market!

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.