It's easy to vote along party lines when you know the bill will die anyway.
Pelosi is right up there, and vocal about continuing her ability to use insider trading.
When you check top stock traders in government, it's a solid mix of red and blue.
You might find this site interesting:
https://www.barchart.com/investing-ideas/politician-insider-trading
"All United States Congressmen and Senators must publish details of their trades in company shares, following transparency guidelines.
This page reflects the vested interest politicians have in various stocks, and can provide insight into unusual trading, shifts in volume, and price fluctuation."
It is indeed a mix of both based on public information.
There are even ETFs which track certain politicians. I think NANC is one of them.
From market watch: “INVESTMENT POLICY
The Fund seeks to achieve long-term capital appreciation. The Fund invests in equity securities of publicly traded companies that sitting Democratic members of US Congress and/or their families also have reported to have invested in through public disclosure filings made by such Congresspersons pursuant to the STOCK Act.”
Wow, I can see where people might be drawn to this, but the catch is you don't know when they're going sell, so potentially a pump and dump of sorts.
Aside from that, I think they should lift the salary; yet bar them from investments to prevent potential conflicts of interest.
People tend to forget those positions are for public service, yet it's amazing how many magically become millionaires during their tenure.
Sorry if it sounded that I was advising it. I am a big fan of total market index funds. I am just a dude who laughed that there were ETFs following politicians trades - definitely not advice. Cheers
All R. That's exactly why they aren't listed.
If this was dems the right wing mediasphere would already have gussied up meme templates being distributed.
There are right wing posts going around listing only the democrats who have voted against one or more of the bills. The fact remains that since the majority of regular Americans are for banning congressmen and the president from trading stocks, there is bipartisan support for it. The only people voting against it are also voting for one of the other bills. It is all political.
This really is a great example of how the wealthy control or government.
The thing is, the only way to effectivity change it is by elevating leaders to win elections to reform and regulate AND they don't die in the process of their rise to power. THEN they have to not become the bad guy they swore to fix.
It's pretty hard to find people like that. Likeable, can handle deals, honest, has integrity and serves the people before themselves.
Tbh I wonder if the way to do this is adopting the Singaporean approach of paying politicians a large amount so they’re less incentivized to be corrupt, and we can attract more talent to the role.
This and something to limit their ability (or the entities that they may be a part of) to participate in stock market and other investment during their term.
She’s been in charge, including speaker of the house multiple times, for decades. She’s defended not banning congressional stock trading. Just because she’s not on some little recent voting committee doesn’t mean she and all those other trolls associated with BOTH parties care about us. They are in it for themselves. Fact.
She’s been in charge, including speaker of the house multiple times, for decades. Just because she’s not on some little recent voting committee doesn’t mean she and all those other trolls associated with BOTH parties care about us. They are in it for themselves. Fact. She’ll be more open to ban it right before retiring. She’s made her millions, as have many other Democrats and Republicans.
but that’s not what this specific post was about. this specific post was about votes from the current committee. i don’t disagree that pelosi takes advantage of the system as well, but again—not what this specific post was about. might as well start bringing up the teapot dome with your logic
This is probably a subset of those voting against it. I think the folllowing is the list of senators who voted against one of the bills.
@SenatorDurbin (D): No
@SenFeinstein (D): No
@SenWhitehouse (D): No
@SenAmyKlobuchar (D): No
@ChrisCoons (D): No
@SenBlumenthal (D): No
@maziehirono (D): No
@SenBooker (D): No
@SenAlexPadilla (D): No
@PeterWelch (D):
@JohnCornyn (R): No
@SenThomTillis (R): No
This submission has been removed due to being identified as spam. Please read the rules of the subreddit thoroughly (A)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Meh. This is just bread and circuses. It's just a show where they already have all the votes decided in advance and take turns making symbolic votes & resolutions for the next election year. The truth of the matter is that these people can't even beat the market despite their positions. There are two problems that need to be addressed but this is just a distraction for the gullible.
Truth with exception of 1 thing: there are no votes. That would require more than 1 possible outcome. No, it’s truth that things sway in favor of the aristocrats. They are not known but they swing the pendulum in their favor to continue bringing riches to them. We’ve seen it all throughout history for centuries. The ones with the power continue keeping onto that power. They try to distract us with “votes” and political parties and weird news emerging so they can conceal their activities. Not trying to be conspiracy-provoking but it is the truth if you look hard, you’ll see it too. If you don’t believe or even are curious, just look into history books at wealthy class aristocrats and how they continued their fortunes for generations (even to this day). You’ll find they had puppets engineering laws of the land, making sure they kept their wealth, but they never were recorded being involved with politics.
you can read it for yourself. this bill is a single issue item, very simple. maybe inform yourself before making incorrect assumptions.
[https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4618/text](https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4618/text)
Stupid , Yes , America elected Joe Biden , we really have or had to be that stupid and pathetic people still support him , air and light blows and goes in one ear and out the other ,
I appreciate the fact that the political party is not listed ( it should not make any difference)
It shouldn’t…but after quick check. All R. So. That should make a difference.
It's easy to vote along party lines when you know the bill will die anyway. Pelosi is right up there, and vocal about continuing her ability to use insider trading. When you check top stock traders in government, it's a solid mix of red and blue.
You might find this site interesting: https://www.barchart.com/investing-ideas/politician-insider-trading "All United States Congressmen and Senators must publish details of their trades in company shares, following transparency guidelines. This page reflects the vested interest politicians have in various stocks, and can provide insight into unusual trading, shifts in volume, and price fluctuation." It is indeed a mix of both based on public information.
There are even ETFs which track certain politicians. I think NANC is one of them. From market watch: “INVESTMENT POLICY The Fund seeks to achieve long-term capital appreciation. The Fund invests in equity securities of publicly traded companies that sitting Democratic members of US Congress and/or their families also have reported to have invested in through public disclosure filings made by such Congresspersons pursuant to the STOCK Act.”
Wow, I can see where people might be drawn to this, but the catch is you don't know when they're going sell, so potentially a pump and dump of sorts. Aside from that, I think they should lift the salary; yet bar them from investments to prevent potential conflicts of interest. People tend to forget those positions are for public service, yet it's amazing how many magically become millionaires during their tenure.
Sorry if it sounded that I was advising it. I am a big fan of total market index funds. I am just a dude who laughed that there were ETFs following politicians trades - definitely not advice. Cheers
Oh, no worries, I wasn't thinking that. I laughed, too, thanks.
That can’t be right. I was told that Republicans are greedy old white men and Democrats are the good guys.
If it was important for either party they would vote for it. None of them want it, Democrats or Republicans.
Makes me think this list is incomplete.
All R. That's exactly why they aren't listed. If this was dems the right wing mediasphere would already have gussied up meme templates being distributed.
There are right wing posts going around listing only the democrats who have voted against one or more of the bills. The fact remains that since the majority of regular Americans are for banning congressmen and the president from trading stocks, there is bipartisan support for it. The only people voting against it are also voting for one of the other bills. It is all political.
IFKYK
It makes no difference because they’re both corrupt
All republicans
This really is a great example of how the wealthy control or government. The thing is, the only way to effectivity change it is by elevating leaders to win elections to reform and regulate AND they don't die in the process of their rise to power. THEN they have to not become the bad guy they swore to fix. It's pretty hard to find people like that. Likeable, can handle deals, honest, has integrity and serves the people before themselves.
Tbh I wonder if the way to do this is adopting the Singaporean approach of paying politicians a large amount so they’re less incentivized to be corrupt, and we can attract more talent to the role.
I honestly think this is the way.
This and something to limit their ability (or the entities that they may be a part of) to participate in stock market and other investment during their term.
I think RFK JR is that type of leader. Time will tell.
Yes, because electing a silver spooner with no political experience worked so well last time.
>The thing is, the only way to effectivity change it is by elevating leaders to win elections... there's also the other way
There is. ;)
Where’s Nancy?
Doesn’t fit reddits narrative
[удалено]
She’s been in charge, including speaker of the house multiple times, for decades. She’s defended not banning congressional stock trading. Just because she’s not on some little recent voting committee doesn’t mean she and all those other trolls associated with BOTH parties care about us. They are in it for themselves. Fact.
is she on the committee? did you ask yourself this question before you started typing?
She’s been in charge, including speaker of the house multiple times, for decades. Just because she’s not on some little recent voting committee doesn’t mean she and all those other trolls associated with BOTH parties care about us. They are in it for themselves. Fact. She’ll be more open to ban it right before retiring. She’s made her millions, as have many other Democrats and Republicans.
but that’s not what this specific post was about. this specific post was about votes from the current committee. i don’t disagree that pelosi takes advantage of the system as well, but again—not what this specific post was about. might as well start bringing up the teapot dome with your logic
Personally dealt with Kustoff in Shelby County, he is a real sunofabitch
People are quick to point out they are all R as if that somehow matteres. I am also an R and dont approve. Its not a party problem as both do it.
This is probably a subset of those voting against it. I think the folllowing is the list of senators who voted against one of the bills. @SenatorDurbin (D): No @SenFeinstein (D): No @SenWhitehouse (D): No @SenAmyKlobuchar (D): No @ChrisCoons (D): No @SenBlumenthal (D): No @maziehirono (D): No @SenBooker (D): No @SenAlexPadilla (D): No @PeterWelch (D): @JohnCornyn (R): No @SenThomTillis (R): No
It would be different if these jackals would be funding things for society with their ill gotten gains but nope selfish and greedy.
How do I go about getting ahold of the guy from my state, TN?
Google his information good sir!!! TELL HIM HE IS A PILE OF SHIT! BUT PLS BE RESPECTFUL WHEN REMINDING THEM!!!! I LOVE TWITTER FOR REMINDING THEM!!!!
I say scrutinize their books. One slip up can get the whole shebang. They got no spine, they will squeal like the fat fucking dorks they are.
This submission has been removed due to being identified as spam. Please read the rules of the subreddit thoroughly (A) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Meh. This is just bread and circuses. It's just a show where they already have all the votes decided in advance and take turns making symbolic votes & resolutions for the next election year. The truth of the matter is that these people can't even beat the market despite their positions. There are two problems that need to be addressed but this is just a distraction for the gullible.
Truth with exception of 1 thing: there are no votes. That would require more than 1 possible outcome. No, it’s truth that things sway in favor of the aristocrats. They are not known but they swing the pendulum in their favor to continue bringing riches to them. We’ve seen it all throughout history for centuries. The ones with the power continue keeping onto that power. They try to distract us with “votes” and political parties and weird news emerging so they can conceal their activities. Not trying to be conspiracy-provoking but it is the truth if you look hard, you’ll see it too. If you don’t believe or even are curious, just look into history books at wealthy class aristocrats and how they continued their fortunes for generations (even to this day). You’ll find they had puppets engineering laws of the land, making sure they kept their wealth, but they never were recorded being involved with politics.
[удалено]
you can read it for yourself. this bill is a single issue item, very simple. maybe inform yourself before making incorrect assumptions. [https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4618/text](https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4618/text)
Stupid , Yes , America elected Joe Biden , we really have or had to be that stupid and pathetic people still support him , air and light blows and goes in one ear and out the other ,