I wouldn’t feel safe making those assumptions. A broker doesn’t leave his knowledge at the office. If you have a friend/relative who is in the business, it would be just as improper to tell you to dump your Apple stocks ASAP over thanksgiving dinner as it would be if he did so from his office. So no, once licensed, you’re pretty much on the job all the time and your personal computer, cell phone, day planner, etc. would all be discoverable in an investigation.
Not a bit, actually. In a CE (and in testing) stress is placed on the fact that ANY recommendation (and brokers are asked all the damn time) counts as official when you’re registered. Home, office, whatever.
Right, but we’re not talking about recommendations are we? So why are you trying so hard to obfuscate? We’re talking about general issues of economics and finance and you’re saying you can’t even discuss those. We’re NOT talking about making recommendations which clearly WOULD be prohibited.
Yes, that’s called insider trading and everyone knows about that. That’s why I said ‘matters of general import.’ There is simply no way that even financial advisers cannot discuss matters of general import relating to economics and finance. It defies credulity.
Yes, but your thesis/insult was ‘no one here understand financial markets’. A broker can be perfectly comfortable discussing the shutdown and the debt ceiling and so forth. But when it comes to its impact on the markets it becomes a much grayer area.
None of that reticence, however, indicates that brokers don’t understand the markets. You threw out a generalized statement - frankly, one that is easily dismissable - and I took the time to inform you of one reason - surely not the only one - you are wrong.
How do you discuss the effect an event might have on the market without giving examples of either specific corporations or generalized industries? In so doing, your expertise will give weight to your commentary and can be construed as suggestive *nudge nudge wink wink * advice.
ETA: Get licensed (not that hard, really, even I held a series 6 for a while), talk about stuff, see what happens, report back.
Actually, the implication was that no one had *demonstrated *an understanding of the markets and since by your own admission you are apparently unwilling to comment on such things, I suppose I will standing by that comment.
People speak in generalities all of the time. I would imagine it’s done in much the same way.
Why on Earth would you think that counts as ‘insider trading’? Unless the person in question is in some position to have inside or advance knowledge, it can’t be. Instead it would trip the ‘suitability’ issue.
I back up GSJ’s advice to work to get your 7. You seem to think you know the markets, it shouldn’t be hard.
Why? So I can work hard, earn lot’s of money and retire? I’m already retired.
And to be honest, on the insider trading thing, I didn’t read the post all that carefully so, sorry, but that one got by me. 
deltasigma, I’m not familiar with you, but this thread is not leaving me with the impression that you are very smart, and you certainly don’t come across as someone who has a very deep understanding of financial markets. What do you think will happen in those markets in the wake of this shut-down? What do you think will happen if there is a brief default?
Given that you’ve already stated my opinion is meaningless to you, why should I bother?
I didn’t state that. I don’t have a high opinion of what appears to lie behind your opinions on this subject, but you started the thread and I am interested in your opinion, if you can be bothered to type it.
My impression was, that since the revelation during the financial crisis of how inept rating agencies are at producing objective ratings, no one in the industry actually uses publicly available ratings anymore. The ratings are now used simply to satisfy investment regulations.
Of course, even if they were still used, the purpose of ratings is to give guidelines to investors who don’t have more detailed knowledge about the investment grade of a particular organization. But very few analysts do not have their own opinion about the quality of US government bonds–almost no one used the US’s grade even in previous eras.
I have no idea what would happen, at least not specifically. I can tell you that the uncertainty that JC referred to will be amplified and the effects it’s had on the economy will be amplified. At that point you say ‘what effects’ and demonstrate that you have no clue as to what’s actually been going on and prove to me that I’ve really been wasting my time.
I don’t really know, but that wouldn’t surprise me. I don’t think S&P is telling anyone anything they don’t already realize.
On what do you base this conclusion? Do you think those amplified effects will be positive, or negative? Because you could make a lot of money with certain knowledge of the future of the market. I encourage you to buy heavily now, in anticipation of your projected outcome.
I guess you don’t grasp the idea of something being positive for some and negative for others. One man’s trash being another man’s treasure. To know that, you need to know specifically how companies and individuals will respond to the changing sets of variables which will be created by a govt shutdown or default. We’re in the middle of a shutdown and I wouldn’t want to predict how this would play out.
No one with money to invest on a large scale is paying the slightest attention to what S & P or the other ratings agencies have to say. As** Fear Itself** and Shakes have suggested above, a flight to safety would result in money fleeing to the same old place: US Treasuries.
Once again, you and everyone else it seems is missing the point. As I just said a couple of posts ago, S&P isn’t telling anyone anything they don’t already know. Did you miss that one? Post 36 if you’d like to check.
S&P is as irrelevant as the canary in the coal mine that keels over. The canary dying isn’t what kills you, it’s just an indicator for what does.