Are Traders Ethical

Originally posted by fkeane
Remenber this: traders are like doctors and more precisely like Proctologists. We make a pretty good living but we don't enjoy explaining what we do for a living at cocktail parties!

I like that. :)
 
Originally posted by Paterfamilias


Well stated. I guess it's a draw then. :)

You can call it whatever you like, but I find it hard to call it a "draw" when you have never even taken your crayons out of the box.


777
 
Originally posted by OPTIONAL777


You can call it whatever you like, but I find it hard to call it a "draw" when you have never even taken your crayons out of the box.


777

Turn of phrase does not an argument make. You understand that, don't you? :p
 
Originally posted by Paterfamilias


Turn of phrase does not an argument make. You understand that, don't you? :p

Do you?

Does anyone see an argument or counter argument in any of these statements made by you in this thread?

"Your second sentence contradicts your first."

"Actually it does."

"By definition the system cannot function without its constituent parts. That much should be obvious."

"As am I. My only point is that saying day traders are extraneous or not necessary to the "system" of equity markets is wholly mistaken."

"You can play word games all you like. I'm not interested. What I'm saying to you is that the system we have would not function without day traders. You can argue terms and definitions all you like. You haven't given me scrap one of evidence to the contrary however. I'd love to hear a real opposing argument, but just saying that day traders are unethical or unnecessary or not a true part of the system is false and not really an argument but an opinion. If you and that other guy Option-something think I'm wrong, fine. I can live with that."

"You write nice paragraphs with plenty of big words but you fail to analyze anything, misguided or not. The semantic content of all your posts has been about nil. Again, that's fine but don't foist your own shortcomings upon me."

"Well stated. I guess it's a draw then."




777
 
Originally posted by OPTIONAL777


Do you?

Does anyone see an argument or counter argument in any of these statements made by you in this thread?

[/i]



777

You can willfully ignore the argument all you like but it doesn't make you right. :D
 
Originally posted by Paterfamilias


You write nice paragraphs with plenty of big words but you fail to analyze anything, misguided or not. The semantic content of all your posts has been about nil. Again, that's fine but don't foist your own shortcomings upon me.

Paternally yours :D

I didn't use any big words. I analyzed your false criticisms. What shortcoming??
 
Originally posted by Paterfamilias


You can willfully ignore the argument all you like but it doesn't make you right. :D

What argument? Thus far you haven't made one that I can see?

You have made statements of opinion, and assumptions of the meaning of what people are saying, but I don't see any constructed argument at all from your side to support your statements or assumptions.

And if you are true to form, your response to this post will be something like:

"Just because you can't see my argument doesn't mean it doesn't exist....."


If you think there is an argument here, I am missing it entirely, as I suspect any other reasonable person is:

"You can play word games all you like. I'm not interested. What I'm saying to you is that the system we have would not function without day traders. You can argue terms and definitions all you like. You haven't given me scrap one of evidence to the contrary however. I'd love to hear a real opposing argument, but just saying that day traders are unethical or unnecessary or not a true part of the system is false and not really an argument but an opinion. If you and that other guy Option-something think I'm wrong, fine. I can live with that."

I don't' know what you mean by "evidence" in the above statement, but most people of reason will accept any argument as valid (not necessarily correct, but valid) if it conforms to the principles of argumentation. A constructed argument exists when someone puts forth a proposition and then follows up that statement with an offer of proof, that proof doesn't need to be actual, but reasonable in the abstract where tactile, visible, auditory, olfactory or palatable proof is unavailable. I have offered up reasons to support my position, but you have offered up none.

You offer up no proof of anything but the games of equivocation and opinion stating you seem to be fond of playing.

You may indeed view yourself as the head of a household, a paterfamilias, but that house that you rule over appears to me to be a garden variety nut house.




777
 
Originally posted by ChrisM
So, who is ethical in modern capitalism ? Big corporate leaders spending nights and days thinking how to cook the books and not being caught ? They are people of success, teaching others what to do and how to be useful for the society, but only independent mind can see, that most of them are little people with very mediocre personality. Better slaves of the system, treating lower slaves like a trash.
Who else then ? Politicians ? Yeah, forget it :)
Lawyers ? Even better joke, isn`t it ? Doctors ? Maybe old fashioned style, if some still survived, the others are just medical business reps :mad:
We can go with this much further, but can You see where the difference is ?
Traders have no unions, association, they don`t corrupt anybody, they do not use kids in third world countries to work for them, they don`t kill anybody, they don`t sell drugs, and finally ... they don`t make money on someonethe, who got the cancer. That`s why they are easy targets.
If we want to find hard working class people, which are ethical, hopefully not from advertisement, marketing or sales ???? Because anybody trying to be ethical in these fields wouldn`t keep his job for long.
As professional trader I feel frankly more ethical, then when I worked for the big companies which forced me to be an animal to others.

Very well said. Yes, trading is ethical. Financial markets are free. Some want to invest, some want to minimize risk, and traders want to take the risk. We make markets more liquid, spreads are thiner, so investors can invest more at lower transaction costs. Funds can hedge more.

We may also ask: Are Insurers Ethical? They make ( or lose ) money by taking risk... and their clients are minimizing risk.
 
Originally posted by aphexcoil
If trading is gambling, then it offers truly better odds than any that you will see in a casino. When was the last time you were in a zero-sum casino? I'm sure someone will steal that name and use it for a casino now!

My final take on markets (especially index markets) is that they aren't random all the time. They are only random a random amount of time and the other times they are trending.

aphie

have you heard of commissions(vig)?? hence not a true zero sum game....Have you ever been gross positve and net negative...oh i forgot you only paper trade you dont pay commissions...sorry
 
Back
Top