Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnL
Music Man, who is "CFX" that you're referring to here?
|
The Collective FX. They are not "broker/dealers", as the law describes. And if the CTFC does try to muscle in, I am pretty sure the operation will simply move offshore. If that doesn't work, then I'll move offshore as well.
However, wouldn't the biggest risk to Forex trading ultimately come in the form of bank regulation? There is a big anti-capital political constituency worldwide. If
liquidity providers are somehow prohibited from servicing leveraged contracts, then it wouldn't matter where you try to trade.
Of course, in the media, there is no voice for the individual Forex trader. So, the voters cheer restrictive regulations on, believing it only affects the Bernie Madoff's of the world. They do not understand that one of the few remaining avenues for the common citizen to lift themselves up out of wage slavery is being removed. And if the media does decide to report on these matters, they will likely portray it as the equivalent of gambling -- a vice to be stamped out.
The Forex industry has only recently come to the attention of the public, mainly through TV ads from brokers. In the current political environment, it may be time for the Forex industry to start doing a little PR for itself. If voters perceive Forex as something that they can benefit from, then they may demand that politicians protect Forex traders' interests, wishing to be Forex traders themselves. Otherwise, only the interests of those who don't want all these pesky retail Forex traders underfoot will be served.
MM