Hacker News Reader

Comment by benced | Hacker News Reader

You can think “there should be a law” without endorsing the reckless and inconsistent ways that Indian regulatory agencies make up laws.

View on HN

No, India does not view things exactly the same way the west does re: the rule of law vs. institutional power. The regulator has broad authority to stop market manipulation and support from the public that we do not want HFT style manipulation skimming money from everyone else in our markets. SEBI does not need to wait for a precisely worded law for every single type of market manipulation that will take years to pass and then be sidestepped in months on some technicality. They stopped bad activity quickly only because they have some actual power to make judgements and enforce them.

That's why the Indian state looks the way it does.

Which is fine, that's how the Indians prefer it. Not every place needs to be the same.

> Which is fine, ... Not every place needs to be the same.

Exactly. Which is why certain country is fine with their school kids being shot at with assault rifles as long as they have freedom™

Nathan Anderson would have a word. It's just tribalism.

There is no fucking way he published those articles without being crooked himself. It's like they say, "no honor among wall street assholes"

We can survive traders of questionable morals, especially if there's proper government; having a wall-street-asshole-tier immoral regulator is a one way street.

    > HFT style manipulation skimming money from everyone else in our markets

This is a pretty bold statement. Do you have any evidence for market manipulation by major market makers? Else, it just reads like tin foil hat.

Do you have any evidence of it reading like a tin foil hat? Otherwise it reads like someone doing that practice or servicing someone doing that practice and skirting responsibility

Literally the case in question here is a crystal clear example of manipulation? What possible value does this trade provide to any other market participant, and where do the profits come from if it doesn't provide value?

More importantly, there is a lot of debate around what value HFT provides to markets, all I'm saying is that in general the Indian public does not believe its a net positive and SEBI acts accordingly. Maybe you disagree, that's fine.

The SEC has similar autonomy in regulating that you describe. Congress does not legislate the rules that the SEC holds firms to.

Not entirely true, Operation Chokepoint 2.0.

I'm not sure how this is related. The so-called "Operation Choke Point 2.0" (which as far as I can tell is just a term used by the Trump administration to describe behavior of the Biden administration) is about bank regulation, which is not under the purview of the SEC.

They (presumably) do after Chevron deference was killed

I don't think this exactly the takeaway of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. It just means judges have more power to weigh in with their own opinions when there is ambiguity involved, not that all the specifics of implementation _have_ to be specified to mean anything.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com