Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

81% Positive

Analyzed from 2412 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#prediction#markets#trading#should#money#more#stock#insider#market#information

Discussion (56 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

the13about 1 hour ago
Just prediction markets? They should be banned from all trading and active investing, period.
roncesvallesabout 1 hour ago
But then how will they make money? They only make a $174k base salary and a 15% cap on how much they can earn from other employment sources. I'm only saying this semi sarcastically. Often the senator's aides earn more than the senators themselves.
cortesoftabout 1 hour ago
Just disallow any personal investment choices. Either they have to invest in an index fund, a mutual fund, or have a manager who makes independent investment decisions.

They could even do the sort of things corporate execs at publicly traded companies do, and fill out forms well in advance about future investment purchases, to avoid the ability to time purchases to inside information.

andrewflnrabout 1 hour ago
> Often the senator's aides earn more than the senators themselves.

Fine. People motivated by money should take jobs other than sitting in Congress.

6AA4FD42 minutes ago
Many if not most intelligent and skilled people are highly motivated by money, not just in pursuit of material comfort but security for their spouse, offspring, and extended family.

I am skeptical of an arrangement where those incentives are at odds with care for critical infrastructure like our political process.

That being said, the current arrangement makes it vastly more profitable to destabilize the economy and sell short than stabilize it and buy long, which is clearly unacceptable to me.

ToValueFunfetti38 minutes ago
~Everybody is motivated by money or else not motivated at all. Money is potential energy for essentially any objective you might have, whether that's developing new tech or donating to charity. By cutting money out, you just select for the subset of people who are more motivated by power or status or who already have more money than they know what to do with.
420official25 minutes ago
Not paying officials enough leads to bribery and corruption. Take away their avenue for insider trading, but let them make a healthy living off it in my opinion.
cbdevidalabout 1 hour ago
Agreed. One thing I appreciate about New Hampshire’s state congress is their pay is fixed at $100/year.
mothballed29 minutes ago
I don't think people that are electable are usually the kind of people that should be in congress. If you have the kind of personality and allegiances to be representing the common man, you can't get elected due to how that process works.

Sortition makes way more sense to me for something like a congress. You just end up with a random selection of the population.

redorb40 minutes ago
The fact senators have been able to stay in the senate for 20+ years, means they are probably making plenty of money. We need another round of FBI bribe stings to clean things up
TimTheTinker27 minutes ago
The 15% cap likely only applies to IRS-reportable gains on the congressperson's personal tax return. That unfortunately doesn't preclude insider trading by spouses, within IRA accounts, or within wholly or partially owned c-corporations controlled by the congressperson or a close family member.

We need a federal law that says: "the definition of material non-public information (MNPI) is extended to mean any non-public information those in federal, state, or local government are privy to that may affect securities prices, and individuals in or adjacent to government are equally subject to prosecution for trading on it".

foxyvabout 1 hour ago
It would be nice if government officials had to do a national index fund (Vanguard or similar) stock purchase plan along the lines of employee stock purchasing in private companies.
noworldabout 1 hour ago
Ban the trading and upping the base pay would probably improve accessibility.
Ekaros14 minutes ago
Well they could always set policies where 174k is a good living salary...
bs728039 minutes ago
People should not be getting into politics for the money. I want senators who are doing it because they want to see a change in the world.
pojzon37 minutes ago
They want to see a change! In theirs account balance. Its still part of the world. Their world.
2ndorderthought31 minutes ago
If you can't make it on 175k you might need to go to rehab.
brendoelfrendoabout 1 hour ago
Yeah, I kind of agree with your semi-sarcastic take. While that salary is well above the US average, the fact is that they almost certainly don't make enough to own or a home in DC, and a second home in their constituency. It all but ensures that there can't be an honest member of congress, unless they feel like sleeping in their office.
ocdtrekkieabout 1 hour ago
What can Congresscritters expense? I'd assume they need to travel between their home state and DC frequently. Would lodging for work where they do not have a home be expensable somewhere?

Isn't the solution to needing two homes to do the job for the government to provide that as a work expense rather than permitting funky financial hijinks?

stvltvsabout 1 hour ago
Blind trusts.
qwertyuiop_37 minutes ago
maxbond25 minutes ago
Not to say they shouldn't be prohibited from trading in more markets or all markets, but prediction markets are so narrow in scope there could be a market on the way a particular senator votes on a particular bill. There will definitely be prediction markets made on the outcome of major proceedings the senator would be voting in, such as confirmations, on multiple platforms.
caymanjim21 minutes ago
There's momentum on this, including from within Congress. I think it's likely in the future. I don't see it happening before at least two more Congressional elections.
adverblyabout 1 hour ago
Exactly!

If we're gonna give this actual attention, we should be focusing on the fact that they should be banned from any form of insider trading or major conflict of interest!

strulovichabout 1 hour ago
They are blocked from insider trading

I think this in the previous comment undervalue just how many more complicated ways there are for corruption to bubble.

Assume super strict rules. Consider this example to circumvent them: Senator-elect A makes an LLC and invest their money (with some friends) in it (before taking office)

They can’t even talk to the money manager. But the manager can see their actions, and the senator can know their ow investments and work in their favor.

nyc_data_geek1about 1 hour ago
UnusualWhales begs to differ
aanetabout 1 hour ago
+1000
ribosometronomeabout 2 hours ago
Any lawyers able to comment on the actual wording of the resolution? It kind of reads to me like in their effort to narrowly capture just prediction markets like Kalshi but not stock markets, they've perhaps unintentionally barred themselves from some other unintended things, too.

https://www.moreno.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/FIL...

>No Member of the Senate may enter into, or offer to enter into, an agreement, contract, or transaction that provides for any purchase, sale, payment, or delivery that is dependent on the occurrence, nonoccurrence, or the extent of the occurrence of a specific event.

Kind of seems like Senators would now be barred from like getting home or life insurance and certain kinds of casino gambling. Or like, making an offer on a home that is rescindable upon a failed inspection?

CGMthrowawayabout 2 hours ago
This is rules of the Senate, not law, so everything is up to interpretation by the Ethics Committee. And we know how that goes
knollimarabout 2 hours ago
What about options and futures?
blazespinabout 2 hours ago
No, because that's real money.
jrmg39 minutes ago
Or buying health insurance?

Edit: I guess that’s not dependent on a ‘specific’ future event.

alex43578about 2 hours ago
Not a lawyer, but that sounds like the language regulating swaps.
bitshiftfacedabout 2 hours ago
Prediction markets have realized that they will lose potential customers if they don't prevent insider trading. Kalshi already has a policy banning politicians from trading. Presumably they understand this, so while I'm glad to see the rule, I wouldn't say it's that self-sacrificing.
SoftTalkerabout 1 hour ago
If they are smart they will stay ahead of government regulation by voluntarily restricting certain types of trading.
yaloginabout 2 hours ago
So they can vote themselves out to do the right thing, and they purposefully allowing themselves to invest in the stock market with insider information. My cynicism tells me they are throwing this bone to divert attention from the stock market loophole
williamtraskabout 1 hour ago
i'm not sure it's productive to think this way. senators could be making more money on prediction markets. they took a nice step which will lead them to make no money on prediction markets (less money overall). it also sets a precedent which could easily be applied to the stock market.

what you're saying is probably on the mind of at least one Senator, but all things considered, this feels like a net-positive move which they didn't have to do.

nemomarxabout 1 hour ago
I get what you're saying but they did also vote themselves a restriction on stock trading in 2012, so the same behavior as this? If prediction markets get really profitable you might expect the same loophole there too.
cowpigabout 1 hour ago
better is always good

when something you think is bad gets better but not better enough, say "more please"

williamtraskabout 1 hour ago
i like your comment better than mine. more please.
perfectstormabout 2 hours ago
good. and the restriction shouldn’t stop at U.S. Senators. anyone with a major influence in their field should be banned from using these prediction/betting apps. as an NBA fan, I was shocked when I saw the reports about Milwaukee star Giannis allegedly using Kalshi to “predict” his own future team during the last NBA trade deadline. how is that even allowed? he even went on to promote the prediction app the day after the trade deadline.
jadboxabout 2 hours ago
Note that this is just a code of conduct change for the ethics committee, not a law. Something is better than nothing.
blazespinabout 2 hours ago
Pure gaslighting. The PM panic is because people want to look like they 'care' about corrupt trading. It's peanuts compared to the 500M they were betting on oil futures.
xrdabout 1 hour ago
I just can't understand how this prevents, say, the son -in-law of the president (totally unelected) going to negotiate for peace in Iran, while his brother in law is on the board of Polymarket and a strategic advisor to Kalshi.

This is going to ruin interesting conversations at their holiday dinners!

arjieabout 2 hours ago
We've learned that these tools are only as effective as the tools of enforcement. A valid technique now available to us is to ban some activity that has valuable returns, then participate in it nonetheless, and simply not enforce action except against those of an opposing tribe. Presumably, violations of this ban simply lead to a hearing before an ethics committee staffed to lean towards the appropriate direction?

Still, it is something. Some chilling effect is better than none. While we do this, it is worthwhile to make prediction markets accessible to our opponents. Ideally, those in corrupt countries aligned against us should be leaking as much information through the markets to us and we should enrich them for it. I'd love to have this kind of distributed espionage with the largest number of bets being on the actions of those aligned against us.

danesparzaabout 2 hours ago
ANY government employee or government contract worker should be banned from trading on prediction markets.
verstabout 2 hours ago
In theory as a government employee you already fear getting in trouble with OGE (Office of Government Ethics) and in normal times this is truly enough. Nobody wants to have a conflict of interest or fail to disclose investments etc. However nothing is normal under the current administration...
vjvjvjvjghvabout 2 hours ago
Ethics rules only apply to the lower ranks and as far I know, they are quite strict. Once you move up the chain, most rules become optional.
sarchertechabout 2 hours ago
Every large company should ban employees and contractors from trading on prediction markets. There are so many ways an employee could make money on prediction markets. Causing outages is probably the easiest, but anything that would get the company in the news would do it.
tt24about 2 hours ago
I find this argument entirely unconvincing.

AWS’s massive outage lead to a significant jump in the stock price.

No single grunt level employee has the power to affect any large company’s share price.

giarcabout 2 hours ago
The US federal workforce is ~2.2 million people. Banning them all from trading on prediction markets isn't the right move. A cafeteria worker in some suburban admin office likely has no inside information they are going to trade on. Members of congress and other high level positions on the other hand should be banned.
bombcarabout 2 hours ago
Arguably they should ban all US residents, citizens, and immigrants from prediction markets.
Avicebronabout 2 hours ago
Or just ban the companies? Opaque drath pools and gambling markets don't have a right to exist.
ohneiabout 2 hours ago
Why stop at prediction markets? Trading in markets is heavily tied to information or information processing advantage so probably all assets should be held by the government to avoid conflicts of interest involving self interests.
radleyabout 2 hours ago
> A cafeteria worker in some suburban admin office likely has no inside information they are going to trade on.

Until they do...

jlaroccoabout 2 hours ago
I don't agree. When the senators walk into the cafeteria talking about the bill they're about to pass, the cafeteria worker can easily overhear their insider information.

Avoiding insider trading on prediction markets seems like an intractable problem to me.

fhnabout 1 hour ago
What about friends, family, neighbors, and benefactors? Prediction markets should be illegal period.
cortesoft44 minutes ago
There is a valid purpose for (some) trades in a prediction market, namely as a form of insurance/risk management for specific risks a company or individual might have.

For example, if you are a company whose current business would be severely hurt if a particular piece of legislation passes, it might make sense to hedge that risk by placing a bet on a prediction market that the legislation will pass. That way, if your business is hurt by the legislation, you can use the proceeds to offset the harm and pivot to something else.

Of course, that doesn’t explain most prediction market contracts, but that is the idea at least.

worik20 minutes ago
And another thing... What is the harm of malfunctioning insider dominated prediction markets, other than those hedging possibilities evaporating?

I am not taking a position, I am wondering.

When they started they were an academic curiosity and experiment. Now they are becoming a social phenomenon are they more harmful than, say, stamp collecting?

"Fools and their money" is OK so long as the fools are truly volunteering, surely?

ASalazarMXabout 2 hours ago
"Prediction market" sounds much better than online gambling.
chowardabout 1 hour ago
It's not gambling if you have information that most of the world doesn't have.
swingboyabout 1 hour ago
How can you even trace it if they’re using crypto?
Advertisement
micah_chattabout 1 hour ago
What about Senate staff?
caymanjim20 minutes ago
The article specifically mentions staff, even in the short snippet before the paywall.

the rules apply to senators, officers and staff

delichonabout 2 hours ago
All of the other markets are prediction markets too, in terms of opportunities to profit from inside knowledge. This is like vowing to quit smoking ... Marlboros.
lapetitejortabout 2 hours ago
Would Martha Stewart be sentenced to prison for lying to federal investigators regarding her "prediction" of the release timing of her next cookbook?
JuniperMesosabout 2 hours ago
Maybe, lots of things count as lying to federal investigators. I don't assume this is necessarily a just legal outcome though.
vkouabout 2 hours ago
That's a good start, and should be followed by banning everyone else from trading on them.
idle_zealotabout 2 hours ago
I agree in spirit, but really it should be the other way around, no? People aren't banned from using them, companies are banned from offering them. I do not want to see a future in which people get their doors knocked down because they're under suspicion of using a gambling app.
jocaalabout 2 hours ago
Why though. This is a dead serious question, what is the difference in using financial derivatives and prediction markets. Both are a transaction between parties that is influenced by some other underlying event. Why is it ok for the event to be a stock price, but not ok for it to be a sports match?
armada651about 2 hours ago
The financial derivatives are (supposed to be) regulated, there's laws against insider trading that keep the market fair. For sports betting there's laws against match fixing.

The prediction market CEOs on the other hand seem to be actively encouraging insider trading and match fixing, it's practically their main selling point.

bulbarabout 2 hours ago
Because it isn't limited to seemingly innocent sports matches.
nickpsecurityabout 2 hours ago
Don't many already do something similar by insider trading on the stock market?

Maybe they didn't need more uncertainty in their portfolios.

josephscottabout 2 hours ago
Good - now do a ban on individual stock trading.
robomartinabout 1 hour ago
Almost there...

Both for Senators and Representatives:

- Term limits (2 consecutive terms max) - No stock market participation in any form during office - No corporate or PAC contributions - Prison for lying to the public or during the course of their work (hearings, media, etc.) - Serious legal consequences for defamation or libel - No special medical/healthcare insurance, accounts or treatment - Pensions only bases on their own contributions, nothing else - No lifetime pensions or healthcare - This one is tough: Consequences for campaign promises not met (part of no lies) - Consequences for shutting down government - Serious consequences for not balancing the budget or driving meaningful reductions that will result in a balanced budget in short order - No media-related jobs for five years after leaving office - No book deals for five years after leaving office - No movie deals for five years after leaving office - No fancy office anything that costs more than your average Ikea/Walmart office furniture - Severe consequences for illicit enrichment; a bartender cannot come out of Congress a multi-millionaire, period.

In other words, like any real job by average citizens. They should not be a privileged and protected class.

rvzabout 2 hours ago
Good. Now they should also ban themselves from insider trading in both the public stock market and private markets as well as prediction markets.
tt24about 1 hour ago
They should do this, but only because senators and congresspeople are terrible at trading stocks and they generally average below SPY.

There’s like 2 famous exceptions, other than those they are simply abysmal traders because their information isn’t worth very much. This problem is so overstated, it’s popular because it’s vaguely populist and exhibits an anti elite sentiment

riotnrrdabout 2 hours ago
lapetitejortabout 2 hours ago
> A member, officer, or employee of the __Senate__ shall not receive any compensation, nor shall he permit any compensation to accrue to his beneficial interest from any source, the receipt or accrual of which would occur by virtue of influence improperly exerted from his position as a member, officer, or employee.

Emphasis mine. This does not cover the judicial or executive branch

handednessabout 2 hours ago
The STOCK Act mostly only had the effect of creating some inconveniences for lawmakers (e.g., their families could still trade based on their guidance), and even that was only the case for a year as Senator Reid's House bill S.716 effectively gutted the STOCK Act and restored the status quo, was passed by unanimous consent after 14 seconds of discussion, and was signed into law by President Obama: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOCK_Act#Amendment

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/716

java-manabout 2 hours ago
But it's so... profitable!