WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2024 Poal.co

898

(post is archived)

[–] 6 pts

The regulations will be written by the people the banks are paying.

[–] 5 pts

Be interested in seeing a video of the level two while this is going on.

[–] 4 pts (edited )

I'm doing day trade shorting of stocks.

Only if it is available to short.

Setup an "One cancels other" bracket and you're greatly protected against reversal where price explodes back up. It's the same trading on the way down as on the way up. Folks just don't use the OCO brackets to protect themselves from a huge price move.

That said...

I think companies should get to choose whether or not they are shortable. You can drive price down in the same way that guy describes shorting. But it would require you have a large position. That would also mean you have cheese in the game. That would also mean you have more interest in driving price up.

Or, it could mean you're an institutional investor hoping to drive price down so you can scoop up the newly freed float because you caused all those other folks' stoplosses to trigger.

[–] 4 pts

A call for regulation is most definitely problem-reaction-solution by the very "offenders." They must see that smaller and smaller guys are playing the game that was supposed to be theirs alone, and are looking to suggest new rules whose usurpation they've already worked out.

Fuck these Jews.

[–] 4 pts

Fucking RBC, i think they had a mandatory vaccine policy too.

[–] 3 pts

Can you do the same thing to them? If you cannot take the exchange to court. And put a freeze on all their business.

[–] 2 pts

(((Vigorous Hand-rubbing intensifying...)))

[–] 2 pts

There's been discussion of having a small fee for orders and canceling orders. Not enough to discourage the average person. But keep the high frequency bots from doing this kind of thing. Only ever discussed among gentlemen. The big guys would never allow something like that.