Hacker News

points by betterunix2 5 days ago | 0 comments

If Kalshi is not a gambling operation then it is an unregulated futures market, which is still illegal. There are perverse incentives in futures markets too, which is why they are regulated.

Also speculators serve an important purpose: hedging strategies require speculators on the other side. It is not just a "certain clientele," there are people who run profitable businesses on speculation (it amounts to collecting insurance premiums from people who want hedges).

[–] whimsicalism 5 days ago

You're posting this all over the site but Kalshi is very clearly a licensed futures market regulated by the CFTC

[–] JumpCrisscross 4 days ago

> Kalshi is very clearly a licensed futures market regulated by the CFTC

As an excluded commodity. Based on the CFTC's own rule making. Based on this logic the SEC can go back to deciding it gets to regulate anything as securities fraud.

[–] betterunix2 5 days ago

How is that at all clear? They are likely subject to CFTC regulations but there are a lot of questions about whether or not they are in compliance.

[–] whimsicalism 5 days ago

Describing an organization with a license from the CFTC as an "unregulated futures market" is just flat wrong, I'm not really sure why you're motte-baileying here.

[–] betterunix2 5 days ago

They offer contracts that are almost certainly outside the scope of regulation, an appeals court has already ruled that some of their contracts are indeed subject to state laws and not CFTC regulation, and they are continuing to push the envelope. How is it wrong to call them an unregulated market under the circumstances?

[–] whimsicalism 5 days ago

Because they are subject to a regulator and hold a license from a regulator.

[–] betterunix2 5 days ago

Bernie Madoff's operation was also subject to a regulator and was properly registered as a broker-dealer; that did not somehow make it a regulated operation, at least not in the sense of actually complying with the regulations. Boiler rooms are also subject to a regulator (the SEC) and obviously are not regulated brokerages.

Really it sounds like this is a disagreement about what it means for a market to be "regulated" -- I draw the line at compliance, you seem to draw the line elsewhere.

[–] whimsicalism 5 days ago

Not to go prescriptivist, but yes I think your "line" for regulated is just semantically incorrect, a non-compliant organization can still be regulated.

[–] mcmcmc 4 days ago

“Regulated by the CFTC” is a bit of an oxymoron when they don’t do any real enforcement

[–] lkey 4 days ago

Oh word? what specific commodity is being traded?

The CFTC was created to hedge real risk. Onions iirc?

Kalshi creates risk where there was none before. The 'future' on the 'commodity' of 'number of dunks by an aging shaq at a halftime show'.

Courts have taken the dimmest possible view of this legal fabrication and I expect their losses in courts to continue without direct intervention by the Trump scions.

[–] jakeydus 4 days ago

People will say (including in this thread) that it allows them to hedge against negative outcomes. What negative outcomes are experienced by someone hedging against whether LeBron flies his helicopter to practice or not?

[–] sire-vc 4 days ago

Helicopter repair companies?

[–] jakeydus 4 days ago

Damn.