Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yes, there are plenty of smart people that can't meet the income requirements and that should be the crux of the constitutional challenge: the assumption that people with money are inherently smarter than those without, while other markets also allow for discretionary risk taking.

Even the SEC commissioner's have pointed out this incongruency.

The only thing supporting this difference is that gambling is regulated at the state level, while securities are regulated by the Feds with a few exemptions so that states feel like they have power. Spot commodities and uncategorized property are ignored by both.

Smart people that are not born into a useful amount of money have to earn and hope absolutely nothing goes wrong for decades, while being cut out from many growth opportunities, but they are able to speculate in many other financial games anyway. There are plenty of smart people that were earning where nothing was going wrong, until suddenly the pandemic sent them back to their parent's house where they will stay for the next decade.

This dichotomy in opportunities wasn't an issue when the equities sector was structured differently. Before the 21st century, companies were going public much earlier and much more frequently. There simply are not Microsoft's and Amazons going public at $37 million valuations anymore.

So now it is an issue.



Calling these investments securities would probably lose a broker their license.


The only time I wrote the word securities I was referring to securities. The other time I was referring to securities I wrote the word equities.

I really don’t know what you are talking about anymore. Turn down the trolling. Congratulations if you have enough money not to care what others are going through. Try not to discount the luck involved in that.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: