That is not correct. Or more accurately, what they are bundling in as "prop trading" is not what the term generally means here on ET and bears little relation to "trading".
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Obama to Propose New Rules on Banksâ Size, Proprietary Trading
- Thread starter belmondo
- Start date
That is not correct. Or more accurately, what they are bundling in as "prop trading" is not what the term generally means here on ET and bears little relation to "trading".
Quote from wave:
The irony is that 90% of the big banks profits come from prop trading. So the 10% other activities is what needs to be controlled! Read between the lines.
even if your statement were true which it is not you are making very serious errors in logic by assuming that the future is similar to the past and that on a risk adjusted basis your so called"prop trading' doesn't need to be controlled.
I'm all for it. Prop desks do not belong in banks. If you're a bank and get free money and backstops, you do not trade. Banking should be boring - like a utility company. Banking is for assisting the REAL economy - not some speculating thieves that don't have skin in the game. Banking should facilitate economic growth, not function like a parasite on the real world.
You want to trade, trade like I do - with your own f#$&ing money.
Then you will understand what the value of money is. And that's a lesson many people in Wall Street need to learn.
You want to trade, trade like I do - with your own f#$&ing money.
Then you will understand what the value of money is. And that's a lesson many people in Wall Street need to learn.
Quote from wave:
Somebody stop this guy. What business does big brother have in prop trading. Sheesh. If Goldman has the $$$ and edge to do well in prop trading their own money, let them be. Why don't we stop Apple or Microsoft from making too much money while we are at it? What happened to free enterprise? Holy Crap.
GS was given a Bank certification but trading like a pureplay hedge fund using deposits and free 0% PPT money.
If GS gets that license revoked, there goes the rally, the fat GS bonuses and profits.
Quote from Misthos:
I'm all for it. Prop desks do not belong in banks. If you're a bank and get free money and backstops, you do not trade. Banking should be boring - like a utility company. Banking is for assisting the REAL economy - not some speculating thieves that don't have skin in the game. Banking should facilitate economic growth, not function like a parasite on the real world.
You want to trade, trade like I do - with your own f#$&ing money.
Then you will understand what the value of money is. And that's a lesson many people in Wall Street need to learn.
Seconded.
Quote from Misthos:
I'm all for it. Prop desks do not belong in banks. If you're a bank and get free money and backstops, you do not trade. Banking should be boring - like a utility company. Banking is for assisting the REAL economy - not some speculating thieves that don't have skin in the game. Banking should facilitate economic growth, not function like a parasite on the real world.
You want to trade, trade like I do - with your own f#$&ing money.
Then you will understand what the value of money is. And that's a lesson many people in Wall Street need to learn.
YES.
Bulge bracket apologists, re-read this till you get it.
Thing is, this is not exactly "game-changing" governance here.
All it takes is a couple grand, a logo, and these banks will have reallocated their risk capital to some other anonymous division of their banks.
Besides. Obama is in bed with hedge funds- take D.E Shaw and Co, though they are a great model for quant trading success, they seemed to turn into a sellout firm making bets on political capital rather than on something in the real economy.
And Citadel seems to be trying to arrange itself as a replacement for a Wall Street investment bank, but is obviously screwing it up as his directors leave in droves.
So really here, the game hasn't changed for joe average on Main Street. For joe trader, it means good bye to liquidity for the time being (like there was any in 2009 anyways). The real squeeze even after sarbanes oxley is going to be on smaller firms.. as access to capital, new fees, and more regulation will make it impossible to run a trading business without moving out of the US.
All it takes is a couple grand, a logo, and these banks will have reallocated their risk capital to some other anonymous division of their banks.
Besides. Obama is in bed with hedge funds- take D.E Shaw and Co, though they are a great model for quant trading success, they seemed to turn into a sellout firm making bets on political capital rather than on something in the real economy.
And Citadel seems to be trying to arrange itself as a replacement for a Wall Street investment bank, but is obviously screwing it up as his directors leave in droves.
So really here, the game hasn't changed for joe average on Main Street. For joe trader, it means good bye to liquidity for the time being (like there was any in 2009 anyways). The real squeeze even after sarbanes oxley is going to be on smaller firms.. as access to capital, new fees, and more regulation will make it impossible to run a trading business without moving out of the US.
Quote from psytrade:
So really here, the game hasn't changed for joe average on Main Street. For joe trader, it means good bye to liquidity for the time being (like there was any in 2009 anyways). The real squeeze even after sarbanes oxley is going to be on smaller firms.. as access to capital, new fees, and more regulation will make it impossible to run a trading business without moving out of the US.
Yes indeed. liquidity will get worse and worse. Scalping is dead in the small/mid cap space
Quote from Misthos:
I'm all for it. Prop desks do not belong in banks. If you're a bank and get free money and backstops, you do not trade. Banking should be boring - like a utility company. Banking is for assisting the REAL economy - not some speculating thieves that don't have skin in the game. Banking should facilitate economic growth, not function like a parasite on the real world.
You want to trade, trade like I do - with your own f#$&ing money.
Then you will understand what the value of money is. And that's a lesson many people in Wall Street need to learn.
Totally agree. Banking is about LENDING to business. If it won't do this what the f#$& is it any good for?