Search results

If someone on this board happens to live in one of these three Congresspeople's districts, please give them a call of support. I can imagine they are also getting a lot of criticism from people on the the far left. So, any calls to counter act that criticism would help.

Wonderful! :)

This might be a dumb question, but has the conservatives in the UK addressed this tax? In other words, do we know for sure that they oppose it?

So what? Bush/Paulsen also stated that they supported a strong dollar. You didn't hear them talk about a transaction tax, did you? lol

Thanks. Very interesting insight. Geithner has stated that he publicly opposes it (which would imply that Obama also opposes it). Do you know if your friend knows if they are acting like Schumer, ie simply posturing and can change their minds, or would they maintain their opposition to the tax?

It is a different world today than it was 30 years ago. People didn't depend on on 401ks for their retirements for example. A transaction tax would indirectly be added as a fee to anybody with a 401k account. As a result, everybody's returns on their retirement accounts are bound to be hit...

My take is that the concern should be reversed. The Dems control the House and there is no filibuster in the House. So, it is probably more likely to pass the house. However, in the Senate we only need 41 senators to stop it. Schumer has already stated he is opposed to it. Him + the other 40...

The tax will have the effect of putting most, if not all, discount brokers out of business. Furthermore, with reduced liquidity. the bid/ask spreads will be vastly higher than they are today. The obvious effect of this will higher indirect costs for all long-term investors. This, it is naive...

It is apples and oranges to compare the UK to the proposal here in the US. The UK tax is filled with so many exemptions that you simply can't compare it to what's proposed here. Heck, if we could get similar exemptions here in the US, this may not be as bad of a deal as it currently is. But...

Would it be OK if we waited until 2012 when the next election takes place?

I agree. At least per the article, Schumer was portrayed as being against this tax. Thus, it has zero chance of passing as long as the Dems have no more than 60 senators. And, they are likely to start losing senators in 2010.

If I understood him correctly (which is not a sure thing), his advice was to move the money from a bailed out bank to either a credit union or a locally owned bank. It should be safe as long as it is under the FDIC limit.

I wish we would be treated the same way as the tobacco industry. The last time I checked that industry is doing just fine. Heck, MO had operating income of almost $5 billion for FY 2008. Compare that to this transaction tax which will kill the traders. Quite a difference from the tobacco...

You could say same the same thing about Las Vegas and the gambling industry. You could say the same thing about pro-sports. You could say same thing about the tobacco industry. Yet, we don't charge those industries with such an exorbitant tax that would kill them off. And that's what...

But what is a small investor? Where draw the line?

Well, neither does the gambling in Las Vegas. Or how about pro sports? And just because a company produces a tangible product doesn't mean it is beneficial for society. Cigarettes comes to mind.

By the way, if Sen. Schumer is indeed against this, then it will not be adopted as long as all of the Republicans in the senate stay united in their opposition to it. Thanks to Schumer they would have enough votes to filibuster it.

I'm glad to hear about Schumer. If people have a chance, try calling them instead of e-mailing them. I have been told it has a bigger impact.

It provides liquidity. Without liquidity you will have bigger spreads. With bigger spreads, all investors will be hurt. Why not learn from Sweden's experience? They tried this and they saw most of their volume move to foreign countries. Why wouldn't the same thing happen here?

I don't think your assumption is correct. They do intend to tax on value of every transaction, not the profit therof. Here's a quote directly from the article in the WSJ that has everyone so upset: "This week, the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute floated the idea of a national...