I never went anywhere.
Most of the objections/replies here fall into two categories.
People know what they are doing, let them do what they want.
Govt should not be Nanny to peopleâs financial decisions. (aka regulations)
I can write a lengthy answer, but I am sure, people wonât read them and ask same question again.
Please note, if govt is not going to be nanny, the society will collapse in a month.
You canât even drive from home to office if not for driving license checks, reliable roads, traffic police, 3rd party insurance, pollution checks, quality control on petrol, quality check on vehicles manufactured, traffic lights, which are all enabled by regulation.
I hope you all are profitable traders, atleast you have a motive to keep this madness going.
Ok, I read through this as I had quite a bit of free time so I have one question.
It can be just me but I fail to see where is the leverage.
If Iâm not wrong most of the retailers lost money trading options against that futures.
So buy the option you pay the entire premium upfront⌠Zero Leverage.
Sell option the margin required is multiple times the (90k margin for which youâd receive only 100-200 rs. in premium) that of the premium received.
Even equity futures have only 5x leverage as compared to the contract value.
So I just fail to see where is the drastic and dangerous leverage that @gsecgsec youâre talking about.
And if a trader doesnât know what he is dealing with, the basics of contracts how is that governmentâs fault?
and as @CN_ib said it would be better if govt put efforts into educating people rather than stopping youâd stop people and black markets would emerge with no regulation which would be a bloodbath. @gsecgsec what are your views about forex trading Iâve seen it being advertised at up to 50x-500x leverage.
I have been driving for the past 4 yrs without any license and still people with licenses and yrs of experience in driving get into accidents so should govt stop private driving or educate people about road safety?
Well then letâs be back in this thread in a month
if you front 90k to trade a contract worth 5lac, that 4.1lac is the leverage.
infy fut/option lot size is 400, price is 1390, contract value is 5.56l.
but you need only 98k to trade it.
Ask retailers to have the entire 5.56l before they touch futures. they will know instantly they are playing with fire.
ââŚblack markets would emerge with no regulation which would be a bloodbathâŚâ
I wont deny that black markets wonât emerge, but the scale at which people will participate will go down drastically. For example, Take CFD exchanges, that allow you to trade securities in US market for Indians. They exist, but if Govt legalizes trading Nasdaq F&O, the scale would be higher because its backed by govt.
Just because murders happen in society today, doesnât mean we can legalize it. if we make murder legal, there will be more murders.
Please check above answer, it wonât be the same.
If drugs are legalized their consumption will 10x, since people who were deterred by law earlier, will participate now.
We are seeing this very thing in US, where trends clearly indicate that legalization clearly result in increased consumption.
Please also read on Opium Wars and what made the China ban drugs.
Ban on drugs by then chinese king actually had tremendous effect, even though its not rooted out completely.
The same reason they donât ban alcohol. They donât have the guts. They fear it would affect elections.
Theyâre outright stupid. They classify derivatives as non/speculative, but in fact physical delivery of derivatives was no required for so long. Nifty and other index derivatives are cash settled even today, traders donât like physical settlements, they wanna rid them, so if itâs not speculative, what is? SEBI might have formal education but theyâre outright stupid.
They do have guts to put 28% tax on Gaming - basically killing the industry in one go. So why would they not ban derivatives? Traders are not a vote bank.
SEBI wonât ban because, retailers need to lose money for big fish to manipulate markets and make money, who actually donate to political parties and STT/StampDuty is nice chunk of revenue.
Traders form a very small user back when it comes to voting, so politicians donât care much about votes.
It actually can. But the winners are in it necause of the money, the losers are in it because of the idiocy. Unless the government can overpower all of them, it canât be banned. The fact that 9 out of 10 are losers means it shall be banned, we live in a democracy. Itâs a democratic issue that theyâre still in the favor of that 1 winner against the 9 losers. Democracy doesnât work that way, an autocracy, on the other hand, with a purpose of benefitting a handful of people, does.
The traders actually vote the government to keep the trading mediums, how foolish is that! Besides, taxes arenât going anywhere, Modi is on for 2024, Amit Kaka declared it.
My tip to you, instead of trying to save everybody, just save yourself. The most intelligent people with the least dirt will do all the rest.
Lots of sour grapes here. They maybe had the freedom to try themselves, failed and now feel that others should not have the same freedom. Typical dictatorial mindset.
The reason people fail, is perhaps because they donât work hard/smart/long enough and donât manage risks and critically, donât wait for evidence before jumping.
Anyway, just this small comment here, no interest in arguing.
You can practically never make it so that more than 50% derivatives traders win. And if the same happens in the spot, 1928 will repeat, or 2008, that also works. I donât care about what you say, you donât know my P&L so stop assuming.
Iâll give you the liberty, 51% people win, then it wonât be democratically wrong for stock exchanges to exist.
P.S. What I say is from the perspective of the government, not from a traderâs.
They actually vote for governments based upon who can provide more trading possibilities. I mentioned it earlier. Iâm not interested in arguing too, Iâm just saying what is right, it is then the âsour grapesâ that I was accused of.
And I said the intelligent people with less dirt will handle the stuff, it is not worth of foolish intelligence to do so, so the question of their protesting is out of the question.
Iâm not interested in arguing, I saw a person worried about it, which is @gsecgsec, and I tried telling him the possibilities that can resolve his worry. The other people, especially the âsour grapeâ ones were never my target audience.
Iâm saying it again, the intelligent people will handle it, not necessary for the retails to protest.
(Also, protesting does not make you win against the government, Gandhi could protest all the way, but without Subhash Chandra Bose, India would have never been freed.)
