The Rothschilds getting news faster because they build an information network is not inside trading. Inside trading is when you have a legal and fiduciary duty not to trade and not to disclose information. The people working in the US government have that obligation and are not abiding by those rules.
Rothschilds getting news faster, high-frequency trading of the old days.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-frequency_trading
Supplying news as fast as possibles is also the business model of Thomson Reuters.
https://www.thetradenews.com/thomson-reuters-algo-news-feed-...
>and fiduciary duty not to trade and not to disclose information. The people working in the US government have that obligation
No they don't. They might have duties not to leak classified information, but not fiduciary duty.
Look, just come out and say you’re okay with them doing what they’re doing. Stop making arguments that are just verifiably untrue.
> Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to declare that such Members and employees owe a duty arising from a relationship of trust and confidence to Congress, the U.S. government, and U.S. citizens with respect to material, nonpublic information derived from their positions as Members or congressional employees or gained from performance of the individual's official responsibilities.
(Sec. 5) Amends the Commodity Exchange Act to apply to Members and congressional employees, or to judicial officers or employees its prohibitions against certain transactions, involving the purchase or sale of any commodity in interstate commerce, or for future delivery, or any swap.
Extends the meaning of "covered government person" (currently restricted to Members of Congress and congressional employees) to include the President, Vice President, an employee of the U.S. Postal Service or the Postal Regulatory Commission, or any other executive branch employee.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/senate-bill/203...
"Members of Congress outperformed the S&P 500—sometimes by huge amounts"
https://fortune.com/2024/01/03/members-of-congress-profit-fr...
"Congressional Stock Trading: The Law, the Conflicts, and the Push for a Ban"
https://govfacts.org/accountability-ethics/ethics-conflicts-...
"The 2 ETFs That Track Congressional Stock Trades"
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/2-etfs-that-track-congress...
The insider trading on oil futures is just on much bigger scale.
It’s also funny when you see their performance charted against Warren Buffet’s. Looks like Warren is a rank amateur who knows very little about the markets and buying companies for the right price compared to the likes of Nancy who must be a supreme multitasker and stock picker.
People have been strung up for less than what counts as business as usual in contemporary, rotten to the core, American business & politics.
> supreme multitasker and stock picker
Not really. Paul Pelosi was a tech investor. If you were heavily concentrated in META, AAPL, AMZN, NFLX, GOOG, etc you should have crushed the S&P and Warren Buffet too.
Famously, Warren Buffet's recent outperformance mostly came from AAPL, which was <1% of his positioning when he put it on. Imagine if it had been several percent! Such were the delights of many tech investors over the last 20 years or so.
I was picking on her but there are dozens of others who outperform Warren by multiples. And ok he’s pretty conservative but even so this chart is pretty damning.
https://watcher.guru/news/congress-stock-trades-outscores-bu...
I’m happy to report I am able to hold both violations of the law and ethics rules in similar contempt.
>Look, just come out and say you’re okay with them doing what they’re doing
Don't put words in my mouth. Moreover I'm not sure how you can come to the conclusion that I'm "re okay with them doing what they’re doing", when I specifically acknowledged they have a duty not to leak classified intel.
>Members and employees owe a duty arising from a relationship of trust and confidence to Congress, the U.S. government, and U.S. citizens with respect to material
That's not "fiduciary duty". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiduciary#Relationships
I’m not entirely sure if you understand what fiduciary duty actually means if you read federal ethics laws and don’t make the connection. Just because you can’t control+f “fiduciary duty” doesn’t mean the concept isn’t identical. Hell, there’s literally a law that bans insider trading futures on unknown information. Not “kind of like it”, literally named verbatim.
And I’m not putting words in your mouth, I’m just calling out your revealed preferences.
You're simply not using the word 'fiduciary' correctly. You seem to have expanded it to mean any sort of legal or ethical obligation with respect to markets, and that's not what it means.
That reads markedly like contracts I’ve seen which define the basis of an individual’s fiduciary duty in consideration of their access to that sensitive information.
They do not have a fiduciary duty that is enforceable in a court of law or equity. But the trusteeship model of representative government is basically how we've conceived of the duties of elected officials in liberal democratic republics since John Locke. As a normative matter, we feel that a public official who benefits their private interests at the expense of the public trust has violated their duties to the public. That just is what a fiduciary relationship looks like.
We’ve also decided the proper way to deal with this elections due to the obvious “who will guard the guards themselves?” problems of trying to enforce this against members of Congress or the President.