Talk:David Ricardo/Archives/2015

Wrongly imputing crimes on Ricardo
Please check these changes, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Ricardo&oldid=605930570&diff=prev. Ricardo used information to act in the market, which is exactly what traders do today. There is actually a very profitable market for financial news, because traders need news to work. The statement that Ricardo would be prosecuted today should be backed or crossed out, in my opinion. "Inside information" is infomation you have that only you could have obtained, because you are part of a company or know people who are. Going to the front line and seeing what's going on is not inside information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paith (talk • contribs) 12:28, 28 April 2014 (UTC) --HeloPait (talk) 12:30, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

The whole inside trading thing looks questionable to me. I haven't had time to google it sufficiently but from blogs (1) it looks like the original source is an anecdote by Samuelson, probably from someplace in his published papers. (2) there seems to be some historical debate on whether Ricardo was what we now would think of as an inside trader, with Norman J. Silberling taking the pro case. (3) I agree with Paith above that in my personal opinion, having a messenger relay information would not be understood as inside trading today, nor would it lead to prosecution. (I don't know about selling on the news). (4) Most biographies of Ricardo don't state that he bought significantly after Waterloo, but that he became rich by buying Britain bonds 4 days before Waterloo and holding them. I'll try to get around to doing a more thorough job, but IMHO, the whole inside trading paragraph is unsourced and could go. TheronJ (talk) 14:04, 7 July 2015 (UTC)