10:1 could be the new leverage rule
- Thread starter Surprise
- Start date
Since this is a life-or-death situation for US FX Brokers, my suggestion would be to enter into an agreement with the State of Michigan whereby you will transfer your head offices and at least 3/4 of workforce to within 1 calendar year
I'm sure that K Street would embrace this scenario rather than lose tax revenue and more jobs
I'm sure that K Street would embrace this scenario rather than lose tax revenue and more jobs
I'm not sure who developed this idea of regulating leverage, specifically. But it appears we in the US are currently in a no-lose we're all winners mittens and helmets nanny state. I've never had, in my 45 years, so many people who are "concerned" about my "safety" and "well-being".
I cropped the following from a local newspaper........
All sensible and practical advice to the likes of you and me, but according to hospital Accident & Emergency records it obviously needs publisizing!
I guess there's a parallel with forex. Sensible people exercise sensible risk management regardless of the leverage they are offered, but then like the reckless sledders there are a few who will end up in the emergency room moaning and bleating about their self-inflicted injuries!
I admit that to sensible people it appears the state goes a little too far at times but then some people need their hand holding simply because they're too reckless or too stupid to see the dangers.
I'm skeptical about nannying being the motive behind these new/proposed rules, it could be they're simply attempting to limit volatility and these extreme boom and bust cycles. As someone else pointed out though, at this level retail forex speculators are hardly a contributing factor to anything other than very short-term volatility!
I don't see why it should be.
Overleveraged and underfunded clients who need excessive leverage rarely last long, I think less than six months is the average.
Unless marketmakers rely on these pikers losses to survive......
Thought as much, the bigger the garbage-mouth the more garbage it takes to fill it!
The more I think about it, the more familiar it becomes.
Back in the 80's we (US) had a bank "crisis", which was just bad behavior on the banks' part. I recall, at the time, there were talks of smaller banks dying off, and only big, govt' supported banks would survive. It appeared to be the case for awhile, then smaller regional and local banks re-appeared, and the cycle started over, to where we sit today.
It may simply be a matter of consolidation, regulation, I'm not sure.
I haven't heard anything from Oanda, apparently they are not terribly concerned.
I trade at 20-1, by default setting, but my strategy would work at 10-1, just saying.
Then again, maybe the buckets are giving in to the leverage rules to avoid any investigation into the MT4/Boston Technologies stop-running software?
Back in the 80's we (US) had a bank "crisis", which was just bad behavior on the banks' part. I recall, at the time, there were talks of smaller banks dying off, and only big, govt' supported banks would survive. It appeared to be the case for awhile, then smaller regional and local banks re-appeared, and the cycle started over, to where we sit today.
It may simply be a matter of consolidation, regulation, I'm not sure.
I haven't heard anything from Oanda, apparently they are not terribly concerned.
I trade at 20-1, by default setting, but my strategy would work at 10-1, just saying.
Then again, maybe the buckets are giving in to the leverage rules to avoid any investigation into the MT4/Boston Technologies stop-running software?
Quote from davidmaria1:
The more I think about it, the more familiar it becomes.
Back in the 80's we (US) had a bank "crisis", which was just bad behavior on the banks' part. I recall, at the time, there were talks of smaller banks dying off, and only big, govt' supported banks would survive. It appeared to be the case for awhile, then smaller regional and local banks re-appeared, and the cycle started over, to where we sit today.
It may simply be a matter of consolidation, regulation, I'm not sure.
I haven't heard anything from Oanda, apparently they are not terribly concerned.
I trade at 20-1, by default setting, but my strategy would work at 10-1, just saying.
Then again, maybe the buckets are giving in to the leverage rules to avoid any investigation into the MT4/Boston Technologies stop-running software?
http://blogs.fxstreet.com/francesc/...pond-cftc-proposal-to-limit-leverage-10-to-1/
PISS OFF MAN .......just go back to your empty wallet
I am so pissed off I am gonna make a huge fool out of you
Why would a person like you (supposedly trading with Oanda) be for 10:1 ??
Why would a person like you (trading with 10-20 pips targets) be for 10:1 ??
You are a humongous failure. Your body matured but your mind
didn't.
HOW DO YOU NOT BURST INTO TEARS WHEN COMPARING YOUR
FINANCIAL SITUATION WITH BULLSHIT YOU POST ON INTERNET
first step toward getting better is looking in the mirror and
asking some real fuking questions
YOU KNOW THE REAL LIFE THINGS, NOT BULLSHIT ON THE NET
keep posting. I am gonna tear you to pieces, pissants like you
are dime a dozen
BUT I GOT TIME, I AM A REAL TRADER
