they need to be accountable to the letter of the law,which seems to be undefined,if we the people don't prosecute,then it's candy in front of a baby,we need to clean house in this election,eradicate all the rep/dems,they are just laughing at us, and see how the machine works without all the backdoor dealsQuote from rwk:
As we are all now painfully aware, sovereign debt is not always low-risk. Will we be able to specify which assets classes are to be avoided (e.g. Greek bonds)?
I see that SIPC says that accounts are not insured against fraud or mismanagement (http://www.stanford-antigua-sec-lawsuit.com/). Considering that the MF Global case might have involved fraud or mismanagement, is there anything more IB can do to put our minds at ease?
don't ave any proof,but what about the trillions already invested in foreign bonds,large positions being held by these giant firms, this loophole may have to stay open as a tool for the fed and bank/trading firms that are working thru this dogpileQuote from Nick29:
"2. That IB holds commodity cash balances solely in either short-term U.S. Treasury securities . . . <b>and general obligations of a sovereign nation</b>."
I thought the rules had just been changed disallowing investment in foreign bonds?
Quote from rwk:
As we are all now painfully aware, sovereign debt is not always low-risk. Will we be able to specify which assets classes are to be avoided (e.g. Greek bonds)?
I see that SIPC says that accounts are not insured against fraud or mismanagement (http://www.stanford-antigua-sec-lawsuit.com/). Considering that the MF Global case might have involved fraud or mismanagement, is there anything more IB can do to put our minds at ease?
Quote from ammo:
they need to be accountable to the letter of the law,which seems to be undefined,if we the people don't prosecute,then it's candy in front of a baby,we need to clean house in this election,eradicate all the rep/dems,they are just laughing at us, and see how the machine works without all the backdoor deals
the lawyers would eat this law up with a simple"the definition of potentially risky foreign debt"is not clearly outlined,hell all forieign debt is potentially risky,that's basically a no change ,changeQuote from Nick29:
CFTC rule change:
"Once implemented, <b>the new CFTC rule also would prohibit futures merchants from using customer cash to invest in potentially risky foreign sovereign debt.</b> It would also restrict investments in money market mutual funds. Investments in Treasuries, US agency debt as well as certain corporate notes would still be permitted. Market participants also may petition the CFTC for an exemption from the rule's restrictions on a case by case basis."
"<b>The vote Monday was five-zero. The changes to the CFTC's rule take effect 60 days after they are published in the Federal Register</b>. Futures merchants would have 180 days after publication to comply with the changes."
http://www.efinancialnews.com/story/2011-12-06/cftc-cotes-restrict-client-funds