Comments on: Let’s Tell the CFTC Where to Go. http://www.midasoracle.org/2008/07/03/lets-tell-the-cftc-where-to-go/ Prediction Markets For All Thu, 20 Nov 2008 07:39:27 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Jason Ruspini http://www.midasoracle.org/2008/07/03/lets-tell-the-cftc-where-to-go/#comment-20201 Jason Ruspini Tue, 08 Jul 2008 02:41:35 +0000 http://www.midasoracle.org/?p=7429#comment-20201 It's nice that you have that opinion Tom, but I would think that the CFTC and most practicing lawyers would disagree. Not to say that no markets deserve an exemptive treatment. It’s nice that you have that opinion Tom, but I would think that the CFTC and most practicing lawyers would disagree.

Not to say that no markets deserve an exemptive treatment.

]]> By: Chris F. Masse http://www.midasoracle.org/2008/07/03/lets-tell-the-cftc-where-to-go/#comment-20172 Chris F. Masse Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:35:32 +0000 http://www.midasoracle.org/?p=7429#comment-20172 @Tom W. Bell: Kapeshe. - However, I would like to see Tom W. Bell's critique of the HedgeStreet's argument, and HedgeStreet's critique of the Bell's argument. - PS: Funny nobody talks about ECMs in this debate. @Tom W. Bell: Kapeshe.
-
However, I would like to see Tom W. Bell’s critique of the HedgeStreet’s argument, and HedgeStreet’s critique of the Bell’s argument.
-
PS: Funny nobody talks about ECMs in this debate.

]]> By: Tom W. Bell http://www.midasoracle.org/2008/07/03/lets-tell-the-cftc-where-to-go/#comment-20168 Tom W. Bell Mon, 07 Jul 2008 16:50:06 +0000 http://www.midasoracle.org/?p=7429#comment-20168 I meant only that, even with much higher caps, the IEM would not support hedging functions. It follows, to my thinking, that the CFTC would have no authority to regulate the market; CFTC jurisdiction reaches only to markets that offer significant hedging functions, IMO. I meant only that, even with much higher caps, the IEM would not support hedging functions. It follows, to my thinking, that the CFTC would have no authority to regulate the market; CFTC jurisdiction reaches only to markets that offer significant hedging functions, IMO.

]]> By: Chris F. Masse http://www.midasoracle.org/2008/07/03/lets-tell-the-cftc-where-to-go/#comment-20161 Chris F. Masse Mon, 07 Jul 2008 08:53:39 +0000 http://www.midasoracle.org/?p=7429#comment-20161 "Those account limits effectively prevent the IEM from supporting significant hedging functions." - It sounded to me, at the reading, that if you argued for the lifting of that $500 cap, that's because you'd favor hedging. - "it should adopt limits considerably more generous" - Maybe, in the rest of the document that we don't see here, you argue that lifting the cap would give more accurate predictions. - I don't know. Anyway, good luck. “Those account limits effectively prevent the IEM from supporting significant hedging functions.”
-
It sounded to me, at the reading, that if you argued for the lifting of that $500 cap, that’s because you’d favor hedging.
-
“it should adopt limits considerably more generous”
-
Maybe, in the rest of the document that we don’t see here, you argue that lifting the cap would give more accurate predictions.
-
I don’t know. Anyway, good luck.

]]> By: Tom W. Bell http://www.midasoracle.org/2008/07/03/lets-tell-the-cftc-where-to-go/#comment-20153 Tom W. Bell Mon, 07 Jul 2008 04:41:11 +0000 http://www.midasoracle.org/?p=7429#comment-20153 I wasn't saying that I want hedging on PMs; I was simply observing that the IEM does not effectively provide hedging (and, thus, impliedly, that the CFTC lacks jurisdiction over it). I wasn’t saying that I want hedging on PMs; I was simply observing that the IEM does not effectively provide hedging (and, thus, impliedly, that the CFTC lacks jurisdiction over it).

]]> By: Chris F. Masse http://www.midasoracle.org/2008/07/03/lets-tell-the-cftc-where-to-go/#comment-20148 Chris F. Masse Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:10:13 +0000 http://www.midasoracle.org/?p=7429#comment-20148 "Those account limits effectively prevent the IEM from supporting significant hedging functions." - If you want hedging on prediction markets, then why don't you argue for the "excluded commodities" solution, then? :-D “Those account limits effectively prevent the IEM from supporting significant hedging functions.”
-
If you want hedging on prediction markets, then why don’t you argue for the “excluded commodities” solution, then? :-D

]]> By: Medemi http://www.midasoracle.org/2008/07/03/lets-tell-the-cftc-where-to-go/#comment-20053 Medemi Fri, 04 Jul 2008 22:48:16 +0000 http://www.midasoracle.org/?p=7429#comment-20053 Let's say I had to spend $100,000 and choose between - 1) buy a house 2) put it on red or black at the casino. - Interesting choice. :-) Let’s say I had to spend $100,000 and choose between
-
1) buy a house
2) put it on red or black at the casino.
-
Interesting choice. :-)

]]> By: Medemi http://www.midasoracle.org/2008/07/03/lets-tell-the-cftc-where-to-go/#comment-20052 Medemi Fri, 04 Jul 2008 22:37:13 +0000 http://www.midasoracle.org/?p=7429#comment-20052 <em>"Unless of course you know of an “investment” that is risk free? (Betcha ya can’t!!!!! )</em> " - There must still be some people who believe that. Not so long ago stocks were a safe investment. More recently, housing. It makes more sense to believe in fairy tales than to make an objective evaluation and come to the conclusion that gambling is just another form of investing. People want to believe Adonis... please don't take that away from them. “Unless of course you know of an “investment” that is risk free? (Betcha ya can’t!!!!! ) ”
-
There must still be some people who believe that. Not so long ago stocks were a safe investment. More recently, housing. It makes more sense to believe in fairy tales than to make an objective evaluation and come to the conclusion that gambling is just another form of investing. People want to believe Adonis… please don’t take that away from them.

]]> By: Adonis http://www.midasoracle.org/2008/07/03/lets-tell-the-cftc-where-to-go/#comment-20039 Adonis Fri, 04 Jul 2008 17:54:36 +0000 http://www.midasoracle.org/?p=7429#comment-20039 This seems to be a political issue of definition. One which is likely to enrich lawyers more than either investors or would-be gamblers. Seems to me that the US Government needs to grasp that one man's "investment" is another man's "gamble". There is, actually, no <em><strong>logical</strong></em> difference betweeen the two. Unless of course you know of an "investment" that is risk free? (Betcha ya can't!!!!! ) More important is the foundation logic involved: <em><strong>NEITHER</strong></em> can be of sufficiently high Integrity unless properly structured, <em><strong>REGARDLESS</strong></em> OF ITS LEGALITY!!!! Integrity cannot be managed unless due account of <strong>T</strong>ime itself is taken in EVERY single element of Operation and Regulation. Regulation and Governement involvement in what might be <em><strong>illegal</strong></em> activities? Why <strong>YES</strong>!!!! Is a criminal liable for income tax on his ill-gotten gains??? <strong>You bet he is! </strong>So if a body conducts gambling operations (legally <em><strong>or not</strong></em>) can they avoid the Regulatory requirement to protect the interests of the players, even though if caught they might be prosecuted??? Or taxed on their winnings??? Simply and plainly, you can argue about semantics (investment or gamble) but to <em><strong>engage</strong></em> in your choice, you MUST have Integrity to survive. And you CAN'T have Integrity without constant reference to <strong>T</strong>ime. Adonis This seems to be a political issue of definition. One which is likely to enrich lawyers more than either investors or would-be gamblers.
Seems to me that the US Government needs to grasp that one man’s “investment” is another man’s “gamble”. There is, actually, no logical difference betweeen the two.
Unless of course you know of an “investment” that is risk free? (Betcha ya can’t!!!!! )

More important is the foundation logic involved: NEITHER can be of sufficiently high Integrity unless properly structured, REGARDLESS OF ITS LEGALITY!!!!
Integrity cannot be managed unless due account of Time itself is taken in EVERY single element of Operation and Regulation.

Regulation and Governement involvement in what might be illegal activities?
Why YES!!!!

Is a criminal liable for income tax on his ill-gotten gains???
You bet he is!

So if a body conducts gambling operations (legally or not) can they avoid the Regulatory requirement to protect the interests of the players, even though if caught they might be prosecuted??? Or taxed on their winnings???
Simply and plainly, you can argue about semantics (investment or gamble) but to engage in your choice, you MUST have Integrity to survive. And you CAN’T have Integrity without constant reference to Time.

Adonis

]]> By: The CFTC is going to close the comments in 3 days. We have 3 days left to convince the CFTC to accept FOR-PROFIT prediction exchanges (e.g., InTrade USA or BetFair USA), and counter the puritan and sterile petition organized by the American Enterprise Ins http://www.midasoracle.org/2008/07/03/lets-tell-the-cftc-where-to-go/#comment-20001 The CFTC is going to close the comments in 3 days. We have 3 days left to convince the CFTC to accept FOR-PROFIT prediction exchanges (e.g., InTrade USA or BetFair USA), and counter the puritan and sterile petition organized by the American Enterprise Ins Fri, 04 Jul 2008 07:39:43 +0000 http://www.midasoracle.org/?p=7429#comment-20001 [...] - Tom W. Bell’s petition, which will be sent to the CFTC. [...] [...] - Tom W. Bell’s petition, which will be sent to the CFTC. [...]

]]>