|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
My point EXACTLY. Reducing my opportunity by an act of government is a
stupid way to protect lenders from themselves.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ira Tunik" <ist@xxxxxx>
To: <wl7bdn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 16:29
Subject: Re: [RT] Re: SEC New Margin Rule Proposal
| The margin requirements are not set up to protect the trader or the
investor,
| they are set up to protect the lender. The put up the other part of the
| financial requirement. If you go bust is of no concern to anyone but you.
You
| taking them with you is there concern. Ask the bank that went under
because of
| margin in 1987. Ira.
|
| Michael Ferguson wrote:
|
| > I gotta tell ya, "something has to be done" was the mantra of the
commercial
| > fishing industry a few years ago. Right now there are 10 federal and
state
| > agencies, all armed, that's right, with guns, pointed at commercial
| > fisherman. We are being intentionally driven into bankruptcy by their
| > concerted efforts.
| >
| > BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR!
| >
| > I am living proof that the government has a voracious appetite for
| > exercising control over the maximum number of details of your life. And
once
| > they take up residence, you cannot rid yourself of them. They are
parasites.
| > They exist to prey on you. If they were subject to the same laws we are
they
| > could be indicted on RICO charges.
| >
| > I see the problems of margin debt. I think it would be better for
everyone
| > in the long run if the concerned exchanges set up a graduated margin
system.
| > If you have 2000 in your account, no margin. Or 2% margin. If you have
| > 200000 in your account, then 50%. Or whatever. If the account money is
| > borrowed, no margin. Let the lenders, (the brokerages), do their due
| > diligence.
| >
| > Trust me: you will NEVER be better off by sacrificing opportunity for
| > security. Never. Ever.
| >
| > Michael
| >
| > |
|
|
|