Obviously most here would agree, exactly why there was no chance they weren't gonna interfere. I just wonder from what level it came from, who knows, maybe it even came from the Biden admin.
It probably did. I couldn't imagine Biden was not aware to some degree if not the one to call for a crackdown.
Well it seems the motivations are all out on the public floor for a change, and the wasps nest of WSB sees it, so lets see how many dots they can connect/how many we can help them connect :porky-scared:
Second most upvoted comment on the WSB post:
It's possible that we are in a completely fraudulent system..... (at least 14,300 people agreed)
The potential for radicalization is certainly there, I just hope they don't go the opposite direction.
You'd have to explain this old fella a lot of things: Retail traders, their Apps, the internet... how would you even start?
Buncha ne'er-do-wells on the cyberspace wanna jack up the price of a malt shake to 25 cents!
who knows, maybe it even came from the Biden admin.
Who knows, maybe it came from the corpse of Milton Friedman himself!
True, but they certainly don't seem to fear the ammo it gives to the growth of pretty much any dissident group. No long term thinking, typical as ever. Or maybe they're tryna bolster fascists, who knows...
So pretty much this video then (unabridged version here, predicting this back in 2006).
I just don't understand how a bunch of people on reddit could figure out this mass amounts of naked shorts existed on GME and the SEC is supposed to somehow be blind to it. Like I get that the SEC isn't going to do anything but how are they going to try and justify that they're not doing anything?
and the SEC is supposed to somehow be blind to it.
It's simple. They weren't.
Obviously, but how are they going to pretend they were? We all know the institutions are fraudulent but it's still their job to pretend that they aren't
- They'll continuously pass blame until the story goes away
- Maybe some minion will be a scapegoat
- They'll conflate who's at fault by blaming the WSB crowd, who have no voice or influence
- Many people don't want to think about obvious fuckups like this, so they won't stay glued to the story
I saw someone on Naked Capitalism of all places trying to justify the situation (claiming that it’s possible a stock can be shorted to 140% but that it doesn’t have to be naked shorting), saying:
There are 100 shares. A owns 90 of them, B owns 10. A lends her 90 shares to C, who shorts them all to D. Now A owns 90 shares, B owns 10 and D owns 90—there are 100 shares outstanding, but 190 shares show up on ownership lists. (The accounts balance because C owes 90 shares to A, giving C, in a sense, negative 90 shares.) Short interest is 90 shares out of 100 outstanding. Now D lends her 90 shares to E, who shorts them all to F. Now A owns 90, B 10, D 90 and F 90, for a total of 280 shares. Short interest is 180 shares out of 100 outstanding. No problem! No big deal! You can just keep re-borrowing the shares. F can lend them to G! It’s fine
I haven’t even tried to parse it; it’s the stupidest wall of text I’ve ever seen in my life. If this is your defense that the market is fine and that it’s actually some tendie-lovers from reddit who are the ones causing a disruption, I dunno what to tell ya.
This came from the comments, but for some reason NC posted this person’s defense of the market as a post.
Here's the explanation of that argument I posted a few weeks ago:
🐒 owns a 🍌. 🐍 borrows that 🍌to sell to 🦧. 🐍 wants to borrow another 🍌to sell to 🦍, but 🐒 doesn’t have any more, so they borrow it from 🦧 instead.
🐒 -lend-> 🐍 -sell-> 🦧 -lend-> 🐍 -sell-> 🦍
If that one 🍌is the only one that exists, 200% of 🍌have been shorted. 🐍 now makes double what they would have if the price goes down. 🐒 and 🦧 make money if the price goes up, but also make money from interest lending to 🐍.
But the only way the price goes down in this market is if both 🦧 and 🦍 are willing to sell a 🍌 to 🐍 at a lower price that what they bought a 🍌 from 🐍 at—and that’s stupid, why would they do that?
Normally there are enough market players to mask the stupidity of the whole situation, since there’s always someone around to make a bad trade and lose lots of money. 140% of shares being shorted means we’re no longer in that kind of normal.
If that were true it would still have been a complete clusterfuck, but it's probably not what happened. It was probably naked short selling, and the resolution was probably negotiated through back-channels so as to avoid blowing up the market.
So pleasurable to watch congresspeople expose their own financial interests in the questions they ask as r/wsb watches and roasts them (learning trends) if they are clearly deflecting. This is good stuff folks
Not so invisible anymore, coated in the blood of generation upon generation of proletarians/oppressed
