Aside from the aged and wise father-figure exploit there is also a common psychological exploit used by younger trading marketers, the cool and confident big brother persona. This slick big-brother persona is more common among small-cap and penny-stock marketers. These exploiters tend to be more direct with shows of their wealth and have a younger and more obviously vulnerable demographic in mind to exploit. These big brother charlatans usually aren't pretending to be respectable or consistently scientific in their approach to trading, so unless they're preying on the very young, I think the exploit they execute is less dangerous than the subtle father-figure exploit.
Lack of father figures in trading
- Thread starter Q3D
- Start date
That's my point exactly in my reply to someone else. Your article has absolutely nothing to do with the thread but you wanted to mislead the readers by including the article with your opening statement. In addition, you attempted via tasteless implying that "at risk children" that have absent fathers is due to the theory they are "discretionary traders".
There is absolutely no link between "at risk communities" and discretionary traders" nor traders. Seriously, get off your butt and go to your nearest "at risk community" and knock on doors and then ask the teenagers or mother how many of them have a father that's absent and is a trader.
At risk communities are not trading in the markets. They just don't have the income for such. You yourself stated within a week of your arrival that "traders" need to have a sizable income and you felt trading gurus did not properly inform you of such. Now you're changing shoes and have this "theory" that "at risk people" (absent fathers) are trading and being exploited by trading gurus.
Note: Yes, there are trading gurus (forums, websites, blogs, stocktwits, twitter, facebook, chatrooms) trying to exploit people. My argument is that those people being exploited, they are not missing fathers from at risk communities...no link whatsoever. If I misunderstood you and that's not what you're saying...please correct me.
Seriously, there's no link between trading gurus or discretionary traders or traders or algorithms with "at risk children" nor with "at risk families" nor with "at risk communities".
Yet, one could argue that wall street itself could be more charitable and give back to communities that need a boost in financing better education in schools, tutoring/prep work for SATs/ACTs, funding scholarship programs to pay for college educations and so on even though many organizations on wall street is doing such but I'm saying they can do a lot more.
Regardless, poor taste on your part and scary considering you know nothing (at least you act like it) about the causes of "at risk communities" and to try to link it to trading...that's beyond weird. In contrast, your thread is really about the below quote by you. Thus, you only needed to say the below and I'm sure people (including myself) would understand considering when it comes to money (the markets)...there's someone out there (e.g. Madoff, high frequency traders, trading gurus) exploiting those that trusted them.
@ http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...ers-destabilizing-market-and-profiting-volati
As you can see via the link above, the big exploiters in the markets are those doing high frequency trading. I doubt you'll debate about such considering you've been ranting since your arrival that algorithms are exploiting discretionary traders when in reality...algorithms are exploiting other algorithms, exploiting financial institutions and exploiting anybody that's trading. Thus, do not pretend they are only going after discretionary traders.
Yeah, penny stock marketers have been around since the begging of penny stocks. Nobody is denying such and the same about charlatans.
Just try to remember next time that these people that do the exploiting, they are targeting people with money...not people without money such as those in "at risk communities".
P.S. I highly recommend you visit "at risk communities" and read research articles about the causes and solutions. There's no link to trading.
Last edited:
This thread remind me of:
I was dropped on my head as a child - oh poor pitiful me
Or the younger generation is simply too damn lazy to do the work to figure it out..., and..., too damn unwilling to assume accountability for their results
Trading is only about taking another's money - through hook or crook - period
This fact unpalatable - find another career
===============
Shills exist in all facets of live (car salesman..., for that matter any sales person working off commissions...., look how many ads there on TV for shit no one needs)
Learn to say no
Learn to stand on your own two hind legs
====================
I am responsible for who I am - not my parents..., not my Family..., not whatever life throws at me..., and not because I didn't get enough hugs..., my snotty nose wiped..., or my ass powdered - as a child
RN
I was dropped on my head as a child - oh poor pitiful me
Or the younger generation is simply too damn lazy to do the work to figure it out..., and..., too damn unwilling to assume accountability for their results
Trading is only about taking another's money - through hook or crook - period
This fact unpalatable - find another career
===============
Shills exist in all facets of live (car salesman..., for that matter any sales person working off commissions...., look how many ads there on TV for shit no one needs)
Learn to say no
Learn to stand on your own two hind legs
====================
I am responsible for who I am - not my parents..., not my Family..., not whatever life throws at me..., and not because I didn't get enough hugs..., my snotty nose wiped..., or my ass powdered - as a child
RN
The SEC instituting the pattern day-trader rule requiring $25,000 in capital in 2001 makes it clear that there were a lot of exploiters preying on lower and lower-middle class people who never had the appropriate education and/or capital requirements to start day trading, we need more such interventation and criminal prosecution of some of the worst of these exploiters.
There are some other possibilities regarding the motives of these seemingly benevolent father and big brother figures, who have clearly shown a lack of ethics, perhaps they are not only seeking financial gain directly, perhaps:
1. perhaps their recruitment efforts could put them on the payrolls of the exchanges and brokerages
2. perhaps there is some perverse and sadistic satisfaction derived from engaging in deception, e.g. convincing others that the markets are not random (or chaotic/fast enough at the lower timeframe levels that they will appear random in realtime to discretionary daytraders) and that the odds are not impossibly stacked against them could bring a psychological sense of gratification and power over others, like what a trickster god from mythology would engage in.
3. perhaps some of these trading-education figures aren't consistently profitable themselves but they think there is possibly a 1 in 1,000 chance they can teach others to be consistently profitable. Their clients become an experiment similar to what humans were to father-figure The Architect in The Matrix movies, if .01% of them succeed the experiment will have been a success, they teacher will have learned something about their students, their own teaching skills and the teacher gets intellectual entertainment in addition to money.
There are some other possibilities regarding the motives of these seemingly benevolent father and big brother figures, who have clearly shown a lack of ethics, perhaps they are not only seeking financial gain directly, perhaps:
1. perhaps their recruitment efforts could put them on the payrolls of the exchanges and brokerages
2. perhaps there is some perverse and sadistic satisfaction derived from engaging in deception, e.g. convincing others that the markets are not random (or chaotic/fast enough at the lower timeframe levels that they will appear random in realtime to discretionary daytraders) and that the odds are not impossibly stacked against them could bring a psychological sense of gratification and power over others, like what a trickster god from mythology would engage in.
3. perhaps some of these trading-education figures aren't consistently profitable themselves but they think there is possibly a 1 in 1,000 chance they can teach others to be consistently profitable. Their clients become an experiment similar to what humans were to father-figure The Architect in The Matrix movies, if .01% of them succeed the experiment will have been a success, they teacher will have learned something about their students, their own teaching skills and the teacher gets intellectual entertainment in addition to money.
The FINRA Rule 4210 involving margin requirements in securities (stocks) known as the PDT rule (approved by the SEC) was designed to protect "less sophisticated" day traders of stocks. Rule was approved February 2001 and went into effect August 2001. Those involved (e.g. Bernie Sanders and many others) in pushing that rule initially wanted a wider net that was aimed at high frequency trading (HFT), algorithm trading and day trading because they felt it was the reason for the high volatility in the markets and they wanted away to limit what they consider to be problematic stock price movements. In addition, during the hearings names like Etrade, Scottrading and many other discount brokerage firms were mention. In total the congressional subcommittee (led by SEC chairman Arthur Levitt) examined (investigated) a total of 40 firms and they discover these firms violated compliance rules involving things like Short selling and violated margin/credit extension to customers.
The subcommittee was chaired by Senator Susan Collins (R. Maine) and she was deeply concerned about day trading itself because her investigation revealed that day trading firms like Etrade and prop firms like All-Tech Investment Group mislead newcomers with deceptive advertising. Yeah, I watched the entirety of the hearings and easily related to their concerns. I remember all the data vendors (e.g. Qcharts, eSignal, CQG and many others) back then talked heavily in their advertisements to potential clients about becoming "financially independent" via their state of the art "technical indicators" and the heavy promotion of Bid/Ask data as giving you that "edge". I also remember all those TV advertisements, financial magazine advertisements by many discount brokerage firms saying just open an account and you'll soon have your own island, you'll be giving your boss at work day trading instructions and those infamous commercials by talking babies doing day trading...implying even babies can be successful day traders.
So yeah...it was horrendous deceptive advertising and everybody wanted to be their own wall street.
Then there's Mary Schapiro (person in charge of the NASD at the time of the hearings) published a report that attacked all of wall street that was involved in day trading and in its promotion to their clients. Now the plot thickens because guess whom is the common person in the ears of Collins and Schapiro...its Bernie Sanders. He wanted (still do) to tax trading itself and when it became obvious he wasn't going to get it...Mark O. Barton became famous and Bernie Sanders went after prop firms, HFT and day trading itself.
Note: Bernie Sanders was deeply concerned with prop firms after Mark O. Barton (prop firm trader at All-Tech Investment Group) mass shooting in July 1999. Sanders even brought that up (the mass shooting) during the congressional subcommittee hearings September 1999 for stronger controls involving high frequency trading and day trading.
Yes, there are exploiters praying on the markets and society as some view it today...its wall street. Yet, wall street is too powerful. Those in congress could not get what they wanted involving HFT or prop firms. Instead, they had to reduce what they wanted and settle on the now infamous FINRA Rule 4210 that's commonly known as the PDT rule involving stock trading. For example, they wanted prop firms and discount brokerage firms to set up a psychological screen of customers that wanted to day trade to determine if they're suitable for such. That request was quickly killed although its something I've been ranting about hear at ET for many years that such should be a requirement because I strongly believe that many traders in today's markets should not be allowed to open trading accounts for the purpose of day trading.
Note: Broker associations also put up a big fight about the original rule packages. Some say they were instrumental in getting the rule reduced down to the 25k requirement.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pattern_day_trader
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_O._Barton
Here's a list of mass shootings in the U.S. history (list does not include 2016) and only one of them involved a trader (Mark O. Barton) @ http://abc7ny.com/news/a-history-of-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/1107515/
The documentation of the above is simple as noted by congress itself. Those preying on day traders are the prop firms, discount brokerages, data vendors and wall street itself as the top tier offenders. Their deceptive advertisements were not aimed at the poor because the poor didn't have money to day trade. In contrast, their deceptive advertisements were aimed at the middle class, retirees with money and the rich.
Next, not mentioned in the subcommittee hearings are forum gurus, website gurus, chat rooms and book authors. Yet, its understandable considering many ignorant people that have discount brokerage accounts, trade at prop firms, subscribes to a data vendor do not dare put the blame on wall street itself...much easier to blame the book author for encouraging us to open a trading account and then blame them for not helping us to be "financially independent" and owning our own islands.
Like I said before to Q3D. There should be better screenings at the top tier (brokerage firms) and data vendors about whom they allow to open accounts. That screening should involve psychological evaluations just like any H&R department does for potential new employee at a fortune 500 company, military uses screening as such and many other job occupations does such.
Heck, there was a call for psychological evaluations for new employees at United States Post Offices after a string of post office shootings that we now term when we get mad as "going postal". That screening was rejected and itself they now rely on better education of those doing the hiring.
Regardless to all these rules or potential rules or whom to blame...here's my warning.
More and more retail traders are getting involved in algorithm trading. These are not traders living in poor neighborhoods and they are not fathers of "at risk families". They are smart, educated and savy about the markets...they have adapted to the growing concerns by politicians about "algorithm trading". If they've read any books by book authors...its more likely books about how to get involved in algorithm trading, how to design your systems and what types of education (topics) will help achieve such.
Now guess what when shit hits the fan because one day it will as already starting via the string of publicity arrests of retail traders and private traders as being the blame of illegal algorithm trading that caused billions of lost dollars in the markets. Simply, 10 years from now there will be new breed of Q3D forum members...they will be blaming retail algorithm traders as the reason for their poor trading performance instead of blaming wall street firms that started such and making billions each year from such.
Reminder - Congressional subcommittee went after these firms and failed. All they got was a handshake and a 25k PDT rule as consolation that told the subcommittee to leave wall street alone.
As you can see, congress subcommittee hearings of September 1999 had it right about the culprits preying on the society and its money. Yet, those culprits are too powerful and they create thousands (millions) of jobs and donate millions of dollars. Trying to tax them as Bernie Sanders wants to do or trying to restrict their trading habits as the SEC wants to do...you're going to need to see a global disaster that make 2008 - 2009 financial chaos look like child play o get those types of restrictions so that you really can go after the real culprits preying on society.
P.S. Reality is that data vendors, brokers, prop firms can not risk psychological evaluations of potential clients. They know such would put them out of business. Yet, maybe helpful if they had a screening process involving "credit check", "criminal record" and passing a trading simulation test to determine if someone is suitable for opening a trading account.
The latter three above (credit check, criminal background check and passing of a simulation trading test) at the minimum is something I've discussed often at ET because I truly feel that most traders that gets involved in trading should not be trading.
P.S.S. More universities today than years ago, they now have state of the art trading rooms that are often financed and sponsored by the world's top financial institutions. Wall Street will do whatever it takes to protect trading.
We can either bitch about it, blame others or adapt to it. I rather adapt to it.
The subcommittee was chaired by Senator Susan Collins (R. Maine) and she was deeply concerned about day trading itself because her investigation revealed that day trading firms like Etrade and prop firms like All-Tech Investment Group mislead newcomers with deceptive advertising. Yeah, I watched the entirety of the hearings and easily related to their concerns. I remember all the data vendors (e.g. Qcharts, eSignal, CQG and many others) back then talked heavily in their advertisements to potential clients about becoming "financially independent" via their state of the art "technical indicators" and the heavy promotion of Bid/Ask data as giving you that "edge". I also remember all those TV advertisements, financial magazine advertisements by many discount brokerage firms saying just open an account and you'll soon have your own island, you'll be giving your boss at work day trading instructions and those infamous commercials by talking babies doing day trading...implying even babies can be successful day traders.
So yeah...it was horrendous deceptive advertising and everybody wanted to be their own wall street.
Then there's Mary Schapiro (person in charge of the NASD at the time of the hearings) published a report that attacked all of wall street that was involved in day trading and in its promotion to their clients. Now the plot thickens because guess whom is the common person in the ears of Collins and Schapiro...its Bernie Sanders. He wanted (still do) to tax trading itself and when it became obvious he wasn't going to get it...Mark O. Barton became famous and Bernie Sanders went after prop firms, HFT and day trading itself.
Note: Bernie Sanders was deeply concerned with prop firms after Mark O. Barton (prop firm trader at All-Tech Investment Group) mass shooting in July 1999. Sanders even brought that up (the mass shooting) during the congressional subcommittee hearings September 1999 for stronger controls involving high frequency trading and day trading.
Yes, there are exploiters praying on the markets and society as some view it today...its wall street. Yet, wall street is too powerful. Those in congress could not get what they wanted involving HFT or prop firms. Instead, they had to reduce what they wanted and settle on the now infamous FINRA Rule 4210 that's commonly known as the PDT rule involving stock trading. For example, they wanted prop firms and discount brokerage firms to set up a psychological screen of customers that wanted to day trade to determine if they're suitable for such. That request was quickly killed although its something I've been ranting about hear at ET for many years that such should be a requirement because I strongly believe that many traders in today's markets should not be allowed to open trading accounts for the purpose of day trading.
Note: Broker associations also put up a big fight about the original rule packages. Some say they were instrumental in getting the rule reduced down to the 25k requirement.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pattern_day_trader
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_O._Barton
Here's a list of mass shootings in the U.S. history (list does not include 2016) and only one of them involved a trader (Mark O. Barton) @ http://abc7ny.com/news/a-history-of-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/1107515/
The documentation of the above is simple as noted by congress itself. Those preying on day traders are the prop firms, discount brokerages, data vendors and wall street itself as the top tier offenders. Their deceptive advertisements were not aimed at the poor because the poor didn't have money to day trade. In contrast, their deceptive advertisements were aimed at the middle class, retirees with money and the rich.
Next, not mentioned in the subcommittee hearings are forum gurus, website gurus, chat rooms and book authors. Yet, its understandable considering many ignorant people that have discount brokerage accounts, trade at prop firms, subscribes to a data vendor do not dare put the blame on wall street itself...much easier to blame the book author for encouraging us to open a trading account and then blame them for not helping us to be "financially independent" and owning our own islands.
Like I said before to Q3D. There should be better screenings at the top tier (brokerage firms) and data vendors about whom they allow to open accounts. That screening should involve psychological evaluations just like any H&R department does for potential new employee at a fortune 500 company, military uses screening as such and many other job occupations does such.
Heck, there was a call for psychological evaluations for new employees at United States Post Offices after a string of post office shootings that we now term when we get mad as "going postal". That screening was rejected and itself they now rely on better education of those doing the hiring.
Regardless to all these rules or potential rules or whom to blame...here's my warning.
More and more retail traders are getting involved in algorithm trading. These are not traders living in poor neighborhoods and they are not fathers of "at risk families". They are smart, educated and savy about the markets...they have adapted to the growing concerns by politicians about "algorithm trading". If they've read any books by book authors...its more likely books about how to get involved in algorithm trading, how to design your systems and what types of education (topics) will help achieve such.
Now guess what when shit hits the fan because one day it will as already starting via the string of publicity arrests of retail traders and private traders as being the blame of illegal algorithm trading that caused billions of lost dollars in the markets. Simply, 10 years from now there will be new breed of Q3D forum members...they will be blaming retail algorithm traders as the reason for their poor trading performance instead of blaming wall street firms that started such and making billions each year from such.
Reminder - Congressional subcommittee went after these firms and failed. All they got was a handshake and a 25k PDT rule as consolation that told the subcommittee to leave wall street alone.
As you can see, congress subcommittee hearings of September 1999 had it right about the culprits preying on the society and its money. Yet, those culprits are too powerful and they create thousands (millions) of jobs and donate millions of dollars. Trying to tax them as Bernie Sanders wants to do or trying to restrict their trading habits as the SEC wants to do...you're going to need to see a global disaster that make 2008 - 2009 financial chaos look like child play o get those types of restrictions so that you really can go after the real culprits preying on society.
P.S. Reality is that data vendors, brokers, prop firms can not risk psychological evaluations of potential clients. They know such would put them out of business. Yet, maybe helpful if they had a screening process involving "credit check", "criminal record" and passing a trading simulation test to determine if someone is suitable for opening a trading account.
The latter three above (credit check, criminal background check and passing of a simulation trading test) at the minimum is something I've discussed often at ET because I truly feel that most traders that gets involved in trading should not be trading.
P.S.S. More universities today than years ago, they now have state of the art trading rooms that are often financed and sponsored by the world's top financial institutions. Wall Street will do whatever it takes to protect trading.
We can either bitch about it, blame others or adapt to it. I rather adapt to it.
Last edited:
There's already criminal prosecutions at the top tier level of those exploiting traders and investors on wall street. There's also criminal prosecution and heavy fines of those on the lower tier level.
All big news in the markets when they are caught and then prosecuted. Therefore, obviously such doesn't work in deterring others from doing such and maybe the suggestion I gave is more suitable...similar to what the congressional subcommittee suggested back in September of 1999.
Screenings on both sides...traders and educators to ensure trust among them.
I think those screenings should involved credit checks, criminal background checks, brokers imposing simulation trading exams that both sides (educator and trader) must pass. Then there's the problem of forums where most of the lower tier education is occurring. Look at ET for example...we have tons of education threads by anonymous people. There will need to be a screening process setup for what I consider to be where most education is occurring.
As to the issue involving psychological screenings...more difficult to implement but I think it can be considering many professional occupations have already been doing such for +30 years now.
I guarantee if the above was attempted...there would not be forums because the few that qualify as traders and the few that qualify as educators...it wouldn't be enough to sustain a forum like Elitetrader.com
Book authors, forum gurus, signal calling sites, blogs and so on will continue via just using phrases like "its my opinion", "its my theory" instead of stating something as if it was fact while others just move elsewhere to locations not censor like facebook, twitter and stocktwits...regardless if they're doing such for free or for a fee.
Regardless, social media like the above locations are heavily protected via the freedom of speech. Good luck trying to crack that nut on those popular social medias.
Last edited:
The problem is that its "often" not their money due to margin/leverage being abused by the customer of the broker and the brokers were violating their own rules via extending margin/credit to their customers.
That was what the congressional subcommittee discovered in their investigations. Kind'uv like a prelude to what happen with the 2008 - 2009 financial crisis that was triggered by the subprime mortgages.
Simply, their own money being risk is really not the problem when "less sophisticated" traders are allowed to open trading accounts because in reality they are risking money that's not theirs.
Seriously, the author of this thread is Q3D. When he first arrived he openly argued that the trading guru he had used did not make him aware that trading involved high risks and that it was the trading guru responsibility to have done so beyond such being stated in the disclaimer statement of the trading guru and beyond such being statement in the paperwork he signed when he open his trading account with a broker and beyond what was stated when he subscribed to the data vendor named CQG. In contrast, many here at ET argued with him in stating its "his responsibility" to have understood those disclaimer statements by the guru, broker and data vendor that trading is high risk and you can possibly loose all of your money in the trading account.
Its these types of traders that are less sophisticated because they just don't understand the fine print involved with trading and are more likely to blame others for their failures. That's why there should be a "screening process".
Therefore the problem really begins at the top (wall street itself) and when something goes wrong...shit rolls down the hill as we saw in the subprime housing crisis...many of those people that were given loans were "less sophisticated" and didn't understand what they were getting into...they too often blamed those the gave the mortgages when in reality both sides were at fault.
I gave a warning in a prior message about problems in the markets being caused by algorithm trading. That too started at the top but the order rules are outdated and being abused by the financial institutions. Rules that the SEC can easily fix but wall street is a very powerful entity that doesn't want to lose billions of dollars if the rules are updated.
Ironically, retail traders and private traders are getting more involved in doing their own algorithm trading and we're now seeing more arrests in the news that what they're doing is illegal. Yet, many accuse wall street of doing the same thing just not dramatic as the 2010 flash crash in the markets that shaved 1 trillion dollars out of the markets in which a private algorithm trader had caused via spoofing in Emini ES futures even though he only pocketed about 900k for himself on that particular trading day.
Simply, people aren't just risking their own money.
P.S. The government does go after tax dollars. Its an extra billions dollars being put back into the government pockets and the biggest abusers (tax evasions) are the corporations and rich individuals.
Last edited: