Negatives to Stopping Shorting for the Market?
Started by
Sentient Being
, Sep 19 2008 06:06 PM
3 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 19 September 2008 - 06:06 PM
I'm guessing that in the posts somewhere the possible negatives to this stopping of shorting Financial stocks has been discussed? I'm thinking that a certain amount of shorting might be a part of hedging. That not being allowed to short might in fact depress certain BUYING until the would be buyer finds a different way to hedge?
In the end we retain from our studies only that which we practically apply.
~ Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe ~
~ Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe ~
#2
Posted 19 September 2008 - 06:40 PM
Or create immediate liquidation.
Hedging is just another way of saying you want to sell, albeit via a different way. If people cannot hedge, they will sell stocks outright.
So in the end the government prevents nothing from stocks going down. It's uttter nonsense.
I am not saying naked short-selling or manipulative short selling should be left unchecked.
But to ban short selling alogether shows lack of consideration for other legitimate market participants who come to these huge markets for all kinds of legitimate and diverse purposes.
#3
Posted 19 September 2008 - 06:43 PM
I'm guessing that in the posts somewhere the possible negatives to this stopping of shorting Financial stocks has been discussed? I'm thinking that a certain amount of shorting might be a part of hedging. That not being allowed to short might in fact depress certain BUYING until the would be buyer finds a different way to hedge?
Shorting to me, is a good thing, in many (but NOT all) ways -- BUT -- a couple things for clarity.
1 -- the Market wide ban on shorting is only on NAKED shorting. That is, shorting WITH OUT borrowing shares.
2 -- the ban on "regular" shorting is for financial stocks only -- and is temporary, as far as I can tell.
---------------- a couple thoughts --------------
The guy that came up with these approaches is no slouch -- IMO -- former CEO of Goldman and Secy of the Treasury Paulson a democrat in a Republican Admin. (please KEEP POLITICS OUT OF THIS!!) -- he plus Bernanke.
IMO, some regulation is required to keep out THOSE abuses that can absolutely kill our economy. I was VERY p1$$ed when they repealed Glass Stegall (sp?), and took off the limits on futures position big specs could hold in 1999. (ironically, BOTH because of Robert Rubin, former CEO of Goldman) I was p1$$ed then, even as a trader, because I have been around a long time and have spent a great deal of time studying the history of markets, abuses, and manipulation.
IMO, the repeal of Glass Stegall (sp?), and removal of the limits on futures position by big specs (Hedge funds, etc.), laid the foundation that allowed these bubbles and the ensuing crisis. Individual (people) responsibility AND intuitional (safe and sound practices) responsibility are also VERY MUCH behind it all.
"Don't think...LOOK!"
Carl Swenlin, founder of Decision Point and original Fearless Forecasters board.
Carl Swenlin, founder of Decision Point and original Fearless Forecasters board.
#4
Posted 20 September 2008 - 12:42 PM
You are right, John. I smelled a rat at the time. This is what a very large rat looks like.
Mark
Mark S Young
Wall Street Sentiment
Get a free trial here:
https://book.stripe....1aut29V5edgrS03
You can now follow me on X










