Pelosi Rejects Stock-Trading Ban For Members of Congress (businessinsider.com) 177
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Insider: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday rejected the idea of barring members of Congress and their spouses from holding or trading individual stocks while in office. "We are a free-market economy. They should be able to participate in that," Pelosi said when asked by Insider at her weekly press conference. Insider also asked Pelosi about Conflicted Congress, a five-month-long investigation by Insider that found that 49 members of Congress and 182 senior congressional staffers had violated the STOCK Act, a law to prevent Insider trading. The speaker said she hadn't yet seen the project, but added that it's important that members comply with the law. "If people aren't reporting, they should be," she said. Pelosi's position put her at odds with progressives such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, both of whom have called for barring members of Congress from trading stocks while in office. Earlier this year, NPR found that TikTok users have been watching financial disclosures of sitting members of Congress to help them determine which stocks to invest in. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's stock trading disclosures in particular were "a treasure trove," according to some TikTok users.
"Shout out to Nancy Pelosi, the stock market's biggest whale," said user 'ceowatchlist.' Another said, "I've come to the conclusion that Nancy Pelosi is a psychic," while adding that she is the "queen of investing." "She knew," declared Chris Josephs, analyzing a particular trade in Pelosi's financial disclosures. "And you would have known if you had followed her portfolio." The report notes that the trades Josephs noticed were actually made by Pelosi's investor husband.
"Shout out to Nancy Pelosi, the stock market's biggest whale," said user 'ceowatchlist.' Another said, "I've come to the conclusion that Nancy Pelosi is a psychic," while adding that she is the "queen of investing." "She knew," declared Chris Josephs, analyzing a particular trade in Pelosi's financial disclosures. "And you would have known if you had followed her portfolio." The report notes that the trades Josephs noticed were actually made by Pelosi's investor husband.
Well of course (Score:5, Funny)
$174K/year is barely enough to get by. What do you expect them to do?
Re:Well of course (Score:5, Informative)
Set up a Super PAC and use the donations for personal gain [theguardian.com]. That's what the fraud experts do.
Re: (Score:3)
Haven't there been cases of reps literally sleeping in their offices because they couldn't afford a DC dwelling? I don't think they get a separate housing allowance in addition to their homes back in their districts. Paying for a DECENT DC apartment and a home back home with a wife and a few kids in college... I could see it being a tight squeeze.
Re: (Score:2)
No. There have been numerous cases of Reps sleeping in their offices because they want to make ideological points. It was a well-known quirk of Ron Paul when he was in office, and his son, Rand, did the same for some time.
It became so bad the House considered enacting rules forbidding it, as the offices, while well appointed, are NOT residences and it was getting disgusting. I don't remember if they actually made that rule or not.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Well of course (Score:5, Insightful)
Typical misrepresentation.
AOC, and Bernie Sanders and _most_ other progressives don't hate free market capitalism, they hate the corrupt, the rich make the rules, unnecessary inequality promoting version of "free market" capitalism that is currently in effect in the United States.
The US has a system of "free market" capitalism which unfairly, and to the detriment of society, allows the rich and powerful to write the rules to benefit themselves.
Case in point, Purdue pharmaceuticals.
Ignoring the incredible harm that the US version of "free market" capitalism does to this country is disingenuos. We can do much, much better.
Re: Well of course (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
All I hear about is Marxism good, free market bad.
You may want to visit a psychiatrist if you're hearing voices.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Fox news saying someone is saying Marxism is good is not the same as someone actually saying Marxism is good.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Well of course (Score:4, Funny)
99% of everything in academia now is pro-Marxist. It's even infiltrated the STEM disciplines.
99% more like 100%. Just to pick the most recent entries from Arxiv hep:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.076... [arxiv.org]
Open-Closed Correspondence of K-theory and Cobordism and the Corruption of the Proletariat
https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.076... [arxiv.org]
Elliptic K3 Surfaces at Infinite Complex Structure and their Refined Kulikov models with reference to the Effect of
Labour Power on the Means of Production
https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.077... [arxiv.org]
Incomplete RG: Hawking-Page transition, C-theorem and relevant scalar deformations of global AdS and the Worker will Rise
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The guy's a tit.
Fucking everyone in academia thinks they hire on merit. It is a brutal, fiercely competitive career where you live or die on your work. And people pride themselves on smarts and rationality. And here's a chap who thinks he's super special because He HiReS oN mErIt. Just. Like. Every. One. Else.
When people are asking what you're doing about DE&I, they're basically asking:
1. What are you doing to remove bias from your hiring process (everyone has biases, and you're delusional if you think
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Are you really absolutely sure that the only thing they want to see is that you've hit points 1 and 2, and not that you've implemented an affirmative action system where you have quotas? Because I'm pretty sure that's how many would interpret that grant proposal question.
The question is whether the proposal would have been rejected pre review if he wrote something like 1-2 in the DE&I section. I've seen no evidence that's the case. The thing is he's started bleating on about "wokeness" and "SJW", which
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We don't have free market capitalism and therefor AOC could not benefit from said economic system so it did not benefit her. I hope this enlightenment makes you feel much better.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
If we restrict the ability of people to make a modest living then they are vulnerable to bribes. Conversely unrestricted ability of people in power using information to make money means they are invulnerable to bribes.
Re: (Score:3)
Right, because people with lots of money would never be interested in even more money.
Subject part of joke? (Score:2)
Not too bad as an FP, but I think a relevant Subject might have helped the sarcasm stay on focus. Perhaps even stimulated some more Funny comments. Low hanging fruit might have been some version of Casablanca shock in the Subject?
Even though I don't think the topic of legalized corruption is funny. I think that at a minimum every stock trade of the congress critters and their family members should become public information IMMEDIATELY upon execution. With bonus summaries published before EVERY election.
The
Pelosi is a Cunt (Score:4, Informative)
When I was paying taxes in the USA, I leaned towards the Democrats, but I can say I have believed Pelosi to be a corrupt piece of shit cunt, for decades. There was a great 60 Minutes episode about her when that show used to actually do investigative reporting. They followed her to Italy where she had supposedly gone on a 'fact finding mission'. It turned out all her aids were her immediate and extended family (there were a lot, IIRC at least 15 or more), and their fact finding was to extended relatives in Italy and all the tourist locations, cafes, restaurants (with her family) etc. etc. etc. When the reporter stepped up to call her on it, Pelosi lost her shit and tried to tell the reporter they were out of bounds. Sure, probably spending hundreds of thousands if not millions of taxpayer money on a family holiday. To me, that kind of behaviour is a guaranteed tip of the iceberg kind of incident. She should never be house leader. I always wonder what she has on all the others.
Of course she doesn't want this law in place. It would be too hard for her to make money off of insider trading with it. America will be much better off when both Pelosi and Mitch McConnell die. The sooner the better.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
It's an open secret that all fact-finding trips are junkets like this. I'm not saying Pelosi's excused because everyone does it. I'm saying being outraged at her specifically ignore all the other people you could (should?) be outraged at. It's unacceptable by any of them. If taxpayers could end it, we should.
On the other hand, I do want my congress to pass laws grounded in fact and politicians are not ecologists, civil engineers, medical doctors, etc. How should they write laws that affect things they'
Re: Pelosi is a Cunt (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Like I always say at the end of the day no matter what the letter in front of your name is your paycheck is signed by the same person.
Re: (Score:3)
Republicans and Democrats are the same party.
Ugh that's just a juvenile oversimplification. No, they are not.
They are both somewhat right wing and pretty much aligned on this particular piece of legalised corruption. And others, but not all.
The reason we're so closely divided 50/50 as a nation is due to monopolistic competition with two competitors.
It's not 50/50, the country on average leans somewhat reliably Democrat. Your democratic system puts far more weight on low population states, meaning that Repu
Re: (Score:2)
You cannot possibly claim the mess the US is in now would be the same if the Republicans had the power.
If you refer to the current round of inflation, then ironically it would be the same, because that was a bipartisan production. Both sides were happy to increase federal spending.
And actually, I think Americans are mostly ok with it too: partly because it gives them a chance to complain about the other party.
Re: Pelosi is a Cunt (Score:2)
It's true that during the lockdowns of early 2020, both parties together spent $2 trillion. (CARES act). This was at a time that a lot of companies has layoffs because they couldn't operate. Both parties thought it made sense to help workers who had been laid off and couldn't get a new job during the pandemic.
Then just over the last month, the Democrats spent another $2 trillion. This while companies are having trouble finding enough workers. Precisely the opposite situation.
Because fewer people are working
Re: Pelosi is a Cunt (Score:5, Informative)
Then just over the last month, the Democrats spent another $2 trillion. This while companies are having trouble finding enough workers. Precisely the opposite situation.
They spent about $0.4 trillion in new money. The total bill allocated $1.2T. Of that, $0.6T was reallocating money previously budgeted for infrastructure spending. Another $0.2T was diverting unused COVID relief spending toward infrastructure. And all of that has to go through years of proposals and planning before any of it gets into the economy. None of that is impacting things now.
Your price issues are due to supply chain problems. Demand for items throughout the economy has changed drastically as people's habits have changed. It's not safe to run factories at previous capacity anymore. There's massive backlogs on shipping, waiting for cargo ships to be unloaded.
For a long time we ran the economy on just in time manufacturing. Companies avoid keeping excess inventory whenever possible. That saved a lot of money as long as demand could be accurately predicted, but an economy built that way can't handle any sort of large disruption. It's going to take time to get back to an equilibrium, and until that happens, you're going to see a big mismatch between supply and demand, which drives inflation.
Feeding a troll? (Score:2)
"That trick never works."
But it's the propagation of the troll Subjects that bugs me. If you have any personal credibility, why are you letting the troll exploit it?
Re: (Score:2)
It's true that during the lockdowns of early 2020, both parties together spent $2 trillion. (CARES act). This was at a time that a lot of companies has layoffs because they couldn't operate. Both parties thought it made sense to help workers who had been laid off and couldn't get a new job during the pandemic.
Then just over the last month, the Democrats spent another $2 trillion. This while companies are having trouble finding enough workers. Precisely the opposite situation.
Because fewer people are working, there is a lower supply of goods, causing higher prices.
I'm pretty sure 2 trillion in infrastructure improvements will do more for the US economy than 2 trillion in tax-cuts for the ultra wealthy (TRUMP-CARES-FOR-THE-RICH act) which either got squirrelled away in tax havens or used for stock buybacks.
Re: (Score:2)
If the "infrastructure" bill winds up being anything like the Obama infrastructure bill, it'll just be a slush fund for grifters friendly with the current administration. Nothing of substance will be built. Way to stimulate the economy!
Re: (Score:2)
Funny enough, even though the Democratic reps/senators say they want the rich to pay their fair share, one of the things included in the Build Back Better bill is a repeal of the SALT deduction limit that Trump's tax bill put in place, that directly taxes wealthy people more. It is always interesting when the hypocrisy is so out in the open. Despite Trump's tax bill increasing taxes on the wealthy, it seems to always get these comments about it being a tax giveaway for the rich, despite that the year it w
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry, it appears you misspelled Clinton in your comment, his name isn't spelled GWB.
https://www.investopedia.com/a... [investopedia.com].
Re: I have family members who are alive today (Score:2)
The Affordable Care Act that regulates the modern American health industry is Republican legislation. The Democrats wanted single payer. So, you're full of shit.
The Democrats didn't have the political capital (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, revisionist history much? It was certainly a compromise (inspired by Mitt Romney's system from Massachusetts) to try to get centrist Democrats and at least some Republicans to support it (though in the end, no Republicans actually voted for it). But ever since it passed, federal Republicans have spent years trying to kill it both in congress
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There is nothing about the current Republican party that is 'moderate right wing'. It shouldn't even be allowed to use the name of the Grand Old Party, the party of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt and Eisenhower. Republicans taking credit for the ACA is like taking credit for the EPA, an office founded in the Nixon administration but also one that has been a target of modern Republicans for at least the last 30 years. You don't get to take cre
Re: (Score:2)
He put one forward, unfortunately, it didn't get support.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
It isn't his fault that congress doesn't give a damn about actually fixing the issues.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Pelosi is a Cunt (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The Republicans do not care about the poor but they provide an economy that helps the middle and lower classes. The Democrats use the poor to get votes. They do not care otherwise. The more poor the better for the Democrats because that is their target voter. Democrats are hypocrites. Republicans do not even claim to care.
Oh, that's so cute, you still think Trickle-down/Supply-side economics actually work. The poor and the middle classes have a better life in Communist Scandinavia than they do in the Republican's US. The US economy is fantastic for the wealthy, everybody else gets crumbs from their table and it sucks.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, the economy immediately prior to the covid pandemic was one of the strongest around.
It also provided some of the lowest ever unemployment numbers for minorities that the US has ever seen....it was helpin
Re: (Score:2)
The quality of life for the poor and middle class was still stagnant though. Wealth inequality still increasin
Re: (Score:2)
Not all people are as capable or as lucky in life, just facts of life...
Unless you want to pull back the winners to give to the losers, you won't have this equity that people seem to be bandying about lately.
You will always have rich and poor they way we have it. now...I will say we do need to help boost the middle a bit more, but not sure how since we exported a lot of
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
1. Capitalism has done more to lift the poor up than any other form of government in the history of the world.
2. There are 0 Scandinavian countries which are Communist.
https://denmark.dk/society-and... [denmark.dk]
https://www.britannica.com/pla... [britannica.com]
https://sweden.se/life/democra... [sweden.se]
Re: (Score:3)
Who? Obama? I did not vote for him either. You cannot possibly claim that your life is better under Biden than it was under Trump. Biden is literally looting and destroying e country before your eyes. There will be blowback and the Republicans will take power again, but it might be too late.
Apart from a few idealists on either side, Dem and Rep, the US politicos are all a bunch of corrupt ass holes and if you think the Republicans alone are some beacon of honesty and propriety you are dumber than a bag of hammers.
She must be a psychic! (Score:2)
VCs (Score:3)
Can't trade on public markets? Private Equity comes to mind, private shares, venture capital, etc.
Insider trading and other semi-legal things (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
When you get to make up the rules, you get to make sure they hardly ever affect you. Plus, it's not like the voting populace will do anything about it. What percent of her constitutes will even remember this incident or care comes next local election?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When you get to make up the rules, you get to make sure they hardly ever affect you. Plus, it's not like the voting populace will do anything about it. What percent of her constitutes will even remember this incident or care comes next local election?
They have to vote for her. Or the wrong lizard will win.
Insider Trading is common (Score:2)
We can all do insider trading and many do; few get caught.
Peloci was rich already from her family, she's not likely against it personally. it's way more likely she's avoiding having her party go on record officially and how many will make the party look bad shooting that down. Plus she doesn't like to push things that can't pass which is why she has the #1 record in history for passing stuff.
Peloci doesn't care what is said about her; she has taken positions FOR COVER of members. She wins loyalty that way a
First things first (Score:5, Insightful)
I get what they're trying to accumplish, but wouldn't it be better to prevent them from being bought by corporations?
Re: (Score:2)
I get what they're trying to accumplish, but wouldn't it be better to prevent them from being bought by corporations?
Why is this an either/or?
Re: (Score:2)
Are you certain they are mutually exclusive? Profiting off a company, puts you in alignment with them at least for some period. Likewise I think majority of these market moves are straight buy/sell orders and part of bull markets. If Pelosi started being a nasty bear and shorting markets, I bet the corporations would lobby the shit out of this to get such a policy changed.
Insider trading and other graft is (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not really a left/right thing. Congresspeople from both parties do insider trading.
Rules for thee (Score:2)
But not for me.
Obviously (Score:2)
Why would a rich, White politician do anything that would limit their ability to amass more wealth?
...in my country (Score:2)
...even pseudo-government big-wigs (e.g. industry-regulatory bodies) aren't permitted to do any stock trading.
It's called a "blind-trust".
Upon getting such a job, said big-wig simply gets to tell their already-very-well-paid-and-successful financial investor about the job and the blind trust.
From then on, the big-wig's investments get managed by the investor without any specific input from the big-wig.
The result is that the investor makes the investment decisions (in accordance with the risk/diversity desir
"stock trading" (Score:2)
Just because other people seem to have gotten away with it is no excuse
Day-trading (of whatever) should be turned over to the robots with absolute timestamps. If an error or bug is found, we run it backwards and correct with all of the side-effects
Yes, I'm suggesting bad code and software bugs are better than human malfeasance.
Good! (Score:2)
I, for one, enjoy investing along with congress. They have to disclose their holdings, and saying "I'll have what she's having" is a great way to put their corruption to work for you!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
isn't her district one of the poorest, most rundown areas in san francisco?
Re:And this is why Pelosi has a job (Score:5, Informative)
isn't her district one of the poorest, most rundown areas in san francisco?
The 12th District covers all of SF. Rich rich, and poor poor.
https://www2.census.gov/geo/ma... [census.gov]
Re: And this is why Pelosi has a job (Score:2)
The poorest most rundown areas of San Francisco are still much more expensive than the nice parts of most cities with lots of people likely in the investor classes.
Re: (Score:3)
lets say it honestly:
SF is a bigger shithole than most cities, and because of the politicians who wont allow an expansion of residential zoning, even the shittiest neighborhoods are unaffordable.
Re: And this is why Pelosi has a job (Score:2)
Yeah, such a shithole that people are willing to spend a $million on a studio apartment. Such a shithole.
It's probably 10 times nicer than where you live.
Re: (Score:2)
No one can own property, property belongs to the earth, man.
Re: (Score:2)
No one can own property, property belongs to the earth, man.
Oh yeah? Step on to my property and I'll give you an education on the subject. :)
Re: (Score:3)
A blind trust [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Need a middle ground (Score:5, Insightful)
The issue as I see it isn't complying with the stock act. The problem is influence and the way that decisions you have the power to make influence the markets.
Say over the course of a year my spouse invests heavily in EV and battery stocks. And then a vote comes up (infrastructure bill) that makes big dollar rebates available to consumers who purchase EVs. I vote for the bill and encourage everyone in my party to do so as well.
I don't have to trade a SINGLE share in anything to reap the benefits (because I already had these things in my portfolio). My household is significantly more wealthy (on paper), and when I file my trades in accordance to the tax act nothing looks amiss.
As far as "losing their rights while serving in congress", why not? My partner is in investment banking and the rules on their trades make the stock act look like a joke. Why should congress critters have an even easier go with respect to their financial freedom than people in the industry, when they have more influence?
Politicians are all crooks and the the whole us verses them polarity we're suffering through is designed to distract us from that.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean good grief even people outside the finance industry have to accept restrictions of this sort of things for certain jobs.
I work for a US tech company, and like most US tech companies, stocks are part of the compensation package. My employment contract quite reasonably forbids trading with a conflict of interest, and highlights specific things like not shorting my employer's stock, not making significant investments in my employer's competitors, that sort of thing.
Politicians are all crooks and the the
Re: (Score:2)
. And then a vote comes up (infrastructure bill) that makes big dollar rebates available to consumers who purchase EVs.
I could be wrong, but I believe that got pulled out of the Infrastructure Bill and was moved to the Build Back Better bill, and it might not survive still.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/1... [cnbc.com]
Also, the rebates are badly structured so that the maximum rebate only applies to American Union made cars, so it penalizes Tesla for not being Union, and Ford for making their cars in Mexico. I don't mind the American made requirement, but the Union made is a political payoff to the Unions who support the Ds, and shouldn
Re: (Score:3)
Without you having to pay? If you own any stocks... if you have a 401k that owns stocks. Heck, if you own property that Pelosi does or doesn't decide to put a tramway in front of (yes, she actually profited off a case of that), then YOU are getting screwed. At least when they take a salary, we know who is getting screwed in taxes. When they steal it from other investors with insider deals, not only is the stealing hidden, but they probably paid 100x as much to grift. For example, building a tram where it di
Re: (Score:2)
Guess what, we're paying for it.
Who pays for tax breaks? Who pays for stimulus? Who pays for increased military funding, or for a space program?
It's the taxpayers. And when congress has a personal financial incentive to vote a certain way on those bills, then their vote may not be in the public's best interest.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps some links or sourcing for your claims?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Corrupt Democrats (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Corrupt Democrats (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Funny, depending on your definition of war, Trump is the only modern president to not enter any, or could be in the same group as many presidents, R and D.
https://www.reuters.com/articl... [reuters.com]
Re: (Score:2)
It's been long known that Biden opposed busing in Wilmington. For racist reasons.
Re: Corrupt Democrats (Score:2)
Not disagreeing Biden isn't the greatest but to think Trump is of better value than single ply toilet paper. That's just plain brainwashing or you're a full blown racist just like all in the far right. I hope we have different leadership come the next election, not Trump or anyone with weak morals who bend their knee to him or Biden. I'm mostly Democrat, but right now would love another Bush or Regan.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. Saying Biden is better than Trump is damning with faint praise, but even so Trump is still a worse choice.
I'm mostly Democrat, but right now would love another Bush or Regan.
Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican -- Regan
This has been taken to heart and caused an immense amount of damage to the Republican party.
Re: Corrupt Democrats (Score:2)
Maybe, just maybe we should stop electing celebrities of any sort into public positions.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah let's stick with the existing corrupt politicians. At least we know that we'll be consistently screwed by lying hypocrites. We'd rather see it coming. God forbid someone well known outside of politics ever gets elected.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't being a socialist/leftist give me some perspective on what is not leftist or socialist? I'm not sure how my perspective card got revoked. I used to be a far-right conservative as well. Right wing traditionally means allegiance to the wealthy or ruling class. That the few should benefit at the expense of the many, or at minimum that the masses cannot be trusted to rule themselves. The US is a Republic and has been designed precisely with the thought that the people cannot be trusted. It continues to massively favor the rich and continues to oppress indigenous and black citizens. Biden is just as guilty of supporting that oppressive elitist system as Trump. The only difference is aesthetics. Trump's lies offended "liberals", while Biden's lies offend "conservatives."
Well, the US republic was designed by a bunch of essentially English aristocrats. If you could listen in on the debates of the US ruling classes in 1776 you'd hear a bunch of discussions conducted by a bunch of powdered wig elites with a distinctly upper class English accent. It is not all that surprising that they would not trust the unwashed masses to rule them selves.
Re: Of course. (Score:2)
Likely your reading comprehension is lacking if you think Trump quotes are syntactically sound enough to be comprehended.
Re: (Score:2)
Also this one is a real gem.
https://www.politico.com/news/... [politico.com]
or this gem
https://babel.hathitrust.org/c... [hathitrust.org]
(Last paragraph of page 255 there)