Search results

They still engaged with the unions for decades. Don't make them out to be angels.

Oil didn't shock (in that case) because of supply or demand, it shocked because of the devalued dollar, that's all I'm trying to get at. Supply and demand was at whatever point it was at, but the value of the currency paid de facto for oil, USD, was damaged, so OPEC raised prices to compensate...

The Chinese are being pestered to de-peg their Yan from the dollar. They have so far refused. We saw it increase value from 2005-2008 when it was de-pegged. Clearly they're protecting their exports. Question is, if they continue to see solid growth into 2010, will they ease up on the control...

Good point. When is enough, enough? Never. By unpredictable, I mean for all the things we can list, there will still be other worse things that will only evolve over time.

No. Our military is built using our dollars. Our dollars can not be built using our military for any sustained period of time.

The dollar is not finite. Gold is. There is what is above ground and what is below ground. There is no way to print gold.

The oil shock of the early 70s was a direct result of dollar devaluation. OPEC raised prices to offset the decreased value of payments. Those prices were an example of global inflation that affected all industrious nations.

Gold is not a break even trade when winning. What on earth? Seriously? Gold is a store of wealth, it is accepted in exchange for any currency (practically). It appreciates and depreciates at different speeds against the major currencies. Please, do some research on this before going off...

Seriously? You think that the time in between a dollar collapse and "new world dollars" will be 5 minutes? Such a scenario would entail panic across every financial market in the world. Gold will be the only thing with a clear value. And if you end up with 500 new world dollars in the end...

Where is spot FX covered by CFTC? Spot FX is unregulated.

This will not only hurt active traders (individuals), but hedge funds, which happen to heavily trade for pension fund clients. The problem with this tax, like almost all taxes, is that the consequences are impossible to predict.

Interesting, thanks for the viewpoint. Who do you trade with if you don't mind me asking?

Who cares. It doesn't have to be his version of the bill. A more "esteemed" legislator could write their own, wrapped in a different name and it could pass.

There is a .10% transaction tax in India is what you're saying?

Yes. Defeat the tax. If not, your problem won't be with your trades, the U.S. will experience a massive flight of capital to whatever country(ies) refuse to pass this tax. Remember, IBM already trades on dozen of global exchanges, the liquidity could move to any one of them in a short timeframe...

LOL.. Get a clue. Gallup: http://www.gallup.com/poll/politics.aspx Rassmussen: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll Try again another time with facts.

Agreed, to a point. The key distinction is that most Republicans are not conservatives. What we need are conservatives or classical liberals. We currently have precious few of either.

Zzzzz. Democrats voted for the same bills, and actually had a majority since 2006. Obama and the libs he rode in on have multiplied the deficit that Bush (the supposed conservative) left us.

The reasons for the health care bill have also changed every 10 weeks, but that hasn't stopped it. This is really no time to be a Pollyanna. People need to be educated about how this is anathema to the success of our country. Forget about traders, it will deplete capital flow into the US...

Read the hill link above, it is not just CNBC reporting this. Here it is again: http://www.thehill.com/homenews/house/69295-dems-push-wall-street-150b-stock-tax