It always amazes me how quickly people will come out of the woodwork after a negative story airs about some quirk or 'issue' relating to the stock market. Whether it be inside information, high frequency trading, or a simple discussion about the economy or stock market valuation.
Whatever the 'hot' issue is - you can bet your bottom dollar that almost immediately you are going to hear from someone who will tell you that it's "not that big a deal", or that the issue is very overblown.
Michael Lewis's new book about High Frequency Trading is out and 60 minutes just ran a story (disclaimer: haven't had a chance to watch it yet) - and already there are people coming out to defend HFT and saying that it doesn't affect 'regular' investors.
A) What in the hell does THAT mean?
and more importantly
B) That is total and utter bull.
Has this market become so fragile, so reliant on stimulants that it can't be subjected to ANY critical thought or hard looks?
Here's the Michael Lewis interview:
and here are some of the apologists out there trying to diffuse the issue - Example A, and when the story of HFT first hit.. Example B
RE: Insider trading - http://business.time.com/2013/07/26/why-is-insider-trading-even-illegal/
etc etc - it's just silly.
"I sit on a man's back, chocking him, and making him carry me, and yet assume myself and others that I am very sorry for him and wish to ease his lot by any means possible, except getting off his back"
Leo Tolstoy, Writings on Civil Disobedience (1886)