Trading FX is ethical, trading commodities isn't

Change, yes. Trend, no. The consequences of believing models that are internally inconsistent but are nonetheless worth using as the basis of making major economic decisions should cause everyone pause. Science, like any other profession, has its share of scoundrels.

There is a trend in it being more erratic. You appear to be under the impression that your weather forecast and the global climate models are one and the same. They have very little in common.

As for share of scoundrels, hardly, science doesn't allow for much leeway to be reputable and false. Of course, in the good ole US you have the 3% who would rather take the pay roll and say it's no big deal, but the rest of us don't consider them scientists, they're generally religious nutters who would vote for Palin.
 
Thanks for (attempting) to stay on thread. Sadly it's becoming an increasingly rare phenomena on T2W. The question posed was straightforward and it's a shame so much narrow opinion has already been spewed to render the thread and any further debate pointless.

what i don't get is how can it be UNethical? Because if say you short the dollar and do it so much that dollars are worth less its bad for americans because they can't buy as much foreign goods, but its good for canadians, australians, europeans, because they can buy more american goods, and so on and so on. whats bad for one currency is good for another one, and it goes round and round in circles.

i dont think that speculating on food or oil or shorting stocks is unethical either buts thats a different story.
 
what i don't get is how can it be unethical? Because if say you short the dollar and do it so much that dollars are worth less its bad for americans because they can't buy as much foreign goods, but its good for canadians, australians, europeans, because they can buy more american goods, and so on and so on.:-0 whats bad for one currency is good for another one, and it goes round and round in circles.

i dont think that speculating on food or oil or shorting stocks is unethical either buts thats a different story.
:-0

:(
 
Er, I think he's slightly taken aback by the notion that a weaker $ is a good thing for countries that export to America.
 
No-one here will have enough money to influence the price anyway so why even worry about the ethics?
 
Er, I think he's slightly taken aback by the notion that a weaker $ is a good thing for countries that export to America.

ok bad examples.

what i mean in that when you trade in currencies like Newton said "every action has an equal and opposite reaction". one goes up, another goes down.

Unless you want to decide who the good guys are and who the bad guys are, it all averages out.
 
There is a trend in it being more erratic. You appear to be under the impression that your weather forecast and the global climate models are one and the same. They have very little in common.
Not by any interpretation of my remarks that I can devise.:confused:

As for share of scoundrels, hardly, science doesn't allow for much leeway to be reputable and false.
Hmmm. DDT banned and millions die. Oh well. :cry:

Global warming models that show the "hockey stick" when presented with random data. No problem there. :mad:

Thimerosal causes autism. Tens of thousands of mothers avoid vaccinating their children. :cry:

Scientests are just as subject to greed and political correctness as any other. Peer review is a valiant attempt to counter these influences.

Of course, in the good ole US you have the 3% who would rather take the pay roll and say it's no big deal, but the rest of us don't consider them scientists, they're generally religious nutters who would vote for Palin.
Two out of three of the hoaxes perpetrated on the world that I mentioned came out of the UK. I get no particular pleasure out of this, but country bashing has no place in this discussion.
 
Seeing it is said that 95% of traders lose.

Why don’t we do the world a favour and all go long on wheat tomorrow morning?
 
Last edited:
Top