June 10, 2009
At a minimum - reinstate the uptick rule.
With the absence of "market makers" to stabilize prices please ban naked short selling. To sell stock without requirement of possession invites outright market manipulation. If one does not have to borrow the stock, nor be limited by availablilty there is no limit to the size or timing of the "bets" to be made. It is difficult to say that there are or are not "cohesive groups" of Operators acting together to drive prices down. If there are, the Uptick rule will be easliy circumvented.
It seems wrong, in these times, when American Companies are most vulnerable and Jobs are at most risk to protect these Occult traders who seek profits at the expense of the people who are trying to grow this country.
Proof there is not, but listen to sources of the outcries and the pleas to determine the opportunists and victims.
This may be what remains of Capitalism but we don't think of it as the American way.
It is fully understood that the Stock Markets need the commissions generated by this activity. Severe restrictions simply reduce this added "liquidity" by the Shorters.
So Better yet:
Let us invite traditional Short Selling. However, make it mandatory that the Markets publish the trades with both the long and short positions per trade. Transparency will help quell confusion and panic trading. Why are short sellers allowed to operate in the shadows, only disclosing their activities long after the fact? My trades appear instantly and the market can deal with that information immediately. Short sellers activity is clandestine. For what reason other to help drive pricing down in reaction to perceived broad selloff trading.
Let's end this paternalism - shine some light on all trading and let Mr. Market see what he is really dealing with.
G. O'Brien - retired.