US citizens won't be able to have forex accounts overseas | Page 11 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Overseas brokers for US citizens: legal or illegal? 22 replies

Any brokers offering high leverage accounts to US citizens? 22 replies

Broker offering penny accounts to US citizens? 1 reply

I am not able to create virtual accounts anymore 7 replies

CFTC NEW Document - Overseas Accounts OK? 58 replies

Attachments: US citizens won't be able to have forex accounts overseas
Exit Attachments

US citizens won't be able to have forex accounts overseas

  • #201
  • Aug 27, 2010 10:32pm Aug 27, 2010 10:32pm
Quoting Forexia
... eventually and before you know it, Afghanistan IS where we end up. It is not impossible nor is it unforseeable.
Or, perhaps Singapore? I don't think Afghanistan is a very good example. Afghanistan as we know it, is a pretty lawless state.
  • #202
  • Aug 27, 2010 10:41pm Aug 27, 2010 10:41pm


Quoting The Fool
Alright. Ima let it slide this time. I have called off the black helicopters. For now. Just watch yourself.
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: 190.gif Size: 16 KB
Annoying Precision
  • #203
  • Aug 27, 2010 10:47pm Aug 27, 2010 10:47pm
The point that's trying to made isnt hard to understand...is it?


Quoting ecTrade
Or, perhaps Singapore? I don't think Afghanistan is a very good example. Afghanistan as we know it, is a pretty lawless state.
Annoying Precision
  • #204
  • Aug 27, 2010 10:51pm Aug 27, 2010 10:51pm
http://www.playlist.com/searchbeta/t...20please/all/1
Annoying Precision
  • #205
  • Aug 27, 2010 11:02pm Aug 27, 2010 11:02pm
What, in terms of government over-regulation? No, I don't think Afghanistan is a very good example of this. Having said that, I wouldn't care much to live in Singapore (if I had a choice) either.
  • #206
  • Aug 27, 2010 11:11pm Aug 27, 2010 11:11pm
Quoting ecTrade
Or, perhaps Singapore? I don't think Afghanistan is a very good example. Afghanistan as we know it, is a pretty lawless state.
You know Singapore actually doesn't make a good comparison candidate. Because that place is not only beautiful but people actually like to live there despite of many relatively oppressive laws and regulations. And it's considered a "free" country with free elections and stuff. This is as far as i know.

I chose Afghanistan as really an extreme example just to show what's the worst possible that can happen if we let the government walk all over us. Afghanistan has laws just not made for the people, by the people and definitely not of the people.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #207
  • Aug 27, 2010 11:19pm Aug 27, 2010 11:19pm
Quoting The Fool
Alright. Ima let it slide this time. I have called
off the black helicopters. For now. Just watch yourself.
LOL That's OK. As long as you catch my point.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  • #208
  • Aug 27, 2010 11:39pm Aug 27, 2010 11:39pm
Quoting Forexia
Afghanistan has laws just not made for the people, by the people and definitely not of the people.
The only laws Afghanistan has are at the point of a gun. There's no need for a big bureaucracy for that. Neither is anyone in danger of losing their freedom, because they never had it ... or, at least in recent history.

Yeah, Singapore is probably a much nicer place to live, however, I still don't like the idea of the government telling you what to do all the time. That would be great, if we were all sheep, I guess?
  • #209
  • Aug 28, 2010 12:52am Aug 28, 2010 12:52am
Quoting pipmutt
I haven't seen any posts about how high leverage can benefit trading, the only valid argument for retaining 100:1 seems to be safety of funds.
Safety of funds? Or, do we all mortgage the house to prove how serious we are about trading? No, the whole thing seems like a serious attempt to take out the "little guy."
  • #210
  • Aug 28, 2010 3:53am Aug 28, 2010 3:53am
Quoting erikte279

Well then in your own words explain to me in detail what I dont understand. You keep saying in "practical" terms. Are you kidding with me?
lol, nah I think it's you who's kidding with me.....can't work out how much you're leveraged indeed, yeah ok!

Next you'll be telling me you don't know what your risk is!

Good one, ya got me!

Leverage isn't an important calculation to make anyway, it's more of a by-product, it's only relevant in this discussion because you're all pointlessly whinging about the proposed cut......but I'm sure you already knew that, right!


Quoting ecTrade

Safety of funds?
Ummm yeah you know, safety of funds, insurance in the event your bróker goes bust.......
  • #211
  • Aug 28, 2010 3:57am Aug 28, 2010 3:57am
Quote Pipmut: I haven't seen any posts about how high leverage can benefit trading, the only valid argument for retaining 100:1 seems to be safety of funds.

Well, I trade with 0.01 Lot sizes as my strategy frequently takes a significnt drawdown before profitability. With 10:1 leverage I'm at the mercy of margin calls. My money mangement cannot even stand one sequence of trades with 1:1 Leverage.

I'm not looking for a new system so don't tell me I don't know how to trade. (And that is not even the point here)

So do I count?

BTW I'm using this leverage successfully.

King.
  • #212
  • Aug 28, 2010 4:10am Aug 28, 2010 4:10am
Quoting kingsurfer
Well, I trade with 0.01 Lot sizes as my strategy frequently takes a significnt drawdown before profitability. With 10:1 leverage I'm at the mercy of margin calls. My money mangement cannot even stand one sequence of trades with 1:1 Leverage.

I'm not looking for a new system so don't tell me I don't know how to trade. (And that is not even the point here)

So do I count?

BTW I'm using this leverage successfully.

King.
(Ignoring other issues!), what's your risk, that's the important number.
  • #213
  • Aug 28, 2010 4:19am Aug 28, 2010 4:19am
No, what's your investment capital, and how much is required to "risk" at 10:1? ... and entertain the possibility of being successful. If you can work the "risk" in with much smaller numbers, why not? Otherwise you are simply precluding a lot of folks from taking any risk, myself included. And no, I personally don't like the idea of other folks telling me what I can or cannot do on the matter.
  • #214
  • Aug 28, 2010 4:40am Aug 28, 2010 4:40am
Quoting pipmutt
(Ignoring other issues!), what's your risk, that's the important number.
My risk is way too high at 1:1 leverage; Borderline at 10:1 and safe at 100:1.
  • #215
  • Aug 28, 2010 4:50am Aug 28, 2010 4:50am
Maybe there's some special calculation involved? ... since he is referring to a number. Maybe it's the percentage of the account you are willing to risk on any given trade? Even so, it's still contingent upon using a successful strategy, in which case the amount of funds won't help you any. You just stand to lose a lot more of it all at once ... that is, if you can afford it.
  • #216
  • Aug 28, 2010 4:52am Aug 28, 2010 4:52am
Quoting kingsurfer

My risk is way too high at 1:1 leverage; Borderline at 10:1 and safe at 100:1.
That's a bit vague isn't it, don't you know the actual figures?


Quoting ecTrade
Maybe there's some special calculation involved?
You're one of the people who's against this proposed change in leverage aren't you?



I think some of the replies in this thread clearly demonstrate the need for these rules and regulations, and more, like maybe a mandatory common sense test!! (you couldn't make this stuff up, it's classic!)

-
  • #217
  • Edited 5:20am Aug 28, 2010 5:03am | Edited 5:20am
Quoting pipmutt
You're one of the people who's against this proposed change in leverage aren't you?
If it means shelling out more dough, which I don't have, then absolutely! Or, like I said, it precludes me from trading at all. But, then again, maybe this is preferable to those who already have the money, I guess?
  • #218
  • Aug 28, 2010 5:06am Aug 28, 2010 5:06am
Quoting ecTrade
If it means shelling out more dough, which I don't have, then absolutely! Or, like I said, then it precludes me from trading at all.
Aww come on, the joke's over now, stop pulling my leg!

You guys......
  • #219
  • Edited 6:06am Aug 28, 2010 5:14am | Edited 6:06am
Quoting pipmutt
That's a bit vague isn't it, don't you know the actual figures?
.

Whatever figures I give you, the risk remain 10* more with 10:1 per completed trade sequence; and a hundred times worse at 1:1. Right?

In any case you will alway find that it is not optimal unless your well thought out 10:1 is used.
  • #220
  • Aug 28, 2010 5:37am Aug 28, 2010 5:37am
Quoting pipmutt
Aww come on, the joke's over now, stop pulling my leg!

You guys......
No, I am quite serious about folks not taking my right to "trade" -- albeit it may only be nickels and dimes -- away ... unless of course I was already wealthy in the first place. In which case, no, there would be no need to take issue, and you wouldn't hear me griping and complaining about it.
0 traders viewing now