Amazing to me that things like gamma squeezes, dark pools, and naked shorting are what are driving the “markets are unfair” conversation, and not things like… PDT rules and accredited investor regulations
Show this thread
-
Is the implication that being an accredited with access to private placements means you get better returns? I feel like what actually happens is that rich heirs/dentists/whatever get scammed into shitty high fee VC/PE funds by brokers who flatter their egos.
If you removed or lowered the AI threshold the net result would be that more, and less wealthy, people would get scammed into shitty VC/PE funds.
-
-
Of course if you’re talking about replacing the AI net worth test with like… a test of investing acumen or something? Then I am here for it.
-
I am definitely not against consumer protections - don't get me wrong. I said it elsewhere in the thread, I just think using net worth as a proxy for sophistication is lazy at best, classist at worst. I think there's a better way, and probably does involve acumen tests
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
this is the other thing I was trying to say I have been in maybe a dozen-ish funds and even the ones that paid out nicely if you avg them out w the mediocre ones I'd have done better in SPY over the same time but it it is def very ego-fluffing
- End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.