• henfredemars
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    10 days ago

    Why make it so specific? Can’t we make it illegal to benefit from material, non-public information?

    This is still insider trading, which ought to be illegal, but it appears to be generally accepted.

    • kambusha@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      10 days ago

      Wondering if it’s because the law is taken so literally in the US, instead of being in the “spirit” of the law. So if it’s too broad or vague, someone will use a loophole.

      • henfredemars
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        10 days ago

        I’m not sure we have laws. It depends heavily on who you are whether or not they are enforced. They are more notional generalisms of what we think the law ought to be rather than what it actually is.

      • 0tan0d@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 days ago

        They will have their spouse who just casually gambles place the bet. The Ol’ Pelosi as I like to call it.