http://www.midasoracle.org/2008/07/02/my-question-to-jason-ruspini/ Prediction Markets, etc. Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:13:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://www.midasoracle.org/2008/07/02/my-question-to-jason-ruspini/#comment-19919 Chris F. Masse Thu, 03 Jul 2008 00:16:43 +0000 http://www.midasoracle.org/?p=7414#comment-19919 @Jason Ruspini: No, I didn't mean the economists' petition ---I meant the CFTC's opinion, if it's possible to sense that at this point. - But thanks for your comment. - Next thing is to compare your proposals with Tom Bell's ones. @Jason Ruspini: No, I didn’t mean the economists’ petition —I meant the CFTC’s opinion, if it’s possible to sense that at this point.
-
But thanks for your comment.
-
Next thing is to compare your proposals with Tom Bell’s ones.

]]> http://www.midasoracle.org/2008/07/02/my-question-to-jason-ruspini/#comment-19914 Jason Ruspini Wed, 02 Jul 2008 23:08:39 +0000 http://www.midasoracle.org/?p=7414#comment-19914 Thanks. Do you mean "the economists'" instead of "the CFTC"?.  If so, I think our proposals are compatible.  In general, a public interest exemption is the most likely outcome since it's the path of least resistance with respect to jurisdictional decisions by the CFTC.  Regarding the economists' specific proposal, I have to say that I do not like their "other qualifications" suggestion as applied to non-profits and academics, nor their small-stakes recommendation as it does violence to large tax-related risks people already have.  In those ways my proposal is more comprehensive and less restrictive, though as a matter of pragmatism I do propose many restrictions.  . Of course, things like manipulation would take care of themselves in the long run -- the same way that replacing public with private police forces should, as David Friedman and others argue.  But I am a libertarian, but not an anarcho-capitalist.  Incidentally, I am tempted to argue that being able to hedge one's taxes is a more relevant modern right, yet very much in the same spirit, as the second amendment. Thanks. Do you mean “the economists’” instead of “the CFTC”?.  If so, I think our proposals are compatible.  In general, a public interest exemption is the most likely outcome since it’s the path of least resistance with respect to jurisdictional decisions by the CFTC.  Regarding the economists’ specific proposal, I have to say that I do not like their “other qualifications” suggestion as applied to non-profits and academics, nor their small-stakes recommendation as it does violence to large tax-related risks people already have.  In those ways my proposal is more comprehensive and less restrictive, though as a matter of pragmatism I do propose many restrictions. 
.
Of course, things like manipulation would take care of themselves in the long run — the same way that replacing public with private police forces should, as David Friedman and others argue.  But I am a libertarian, but not an anarcho-capitalist.  Incidentally, I am tempted to argue that being able to hedge one’s taxes is a more relevant modern right, yet very much in the same spirit, as the second amendment.

]]>