You give that cunt too much credit, she has the political capital of a used tampon. Get with it man and focus on your trading not this pigs opinion.
1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today
- Thread starter seasideheights
- Start date
You give that cunt too much credit, she has the political capital of a used tampon. Get with it man and focus on your trading not this pigs opinion.
listen most of you do not have teh forsight to even know that the sun will rise tomorrow... this is how taxes are eventually passed.. OBAMA has the power to do anything.. he loves copying Europe becasue he loves being popular in the world.. screw the usa.. so long as teh world is happy..
anyway the idea is out there and now that mom and pop are pissed at "wallstreet" (GREEDY SOB INVESTMENT BANKERS).. but htey blame all of wall street.. so now is the perfect time to punish wall street with a tax.. people will be all for it... no one cares about the little piss ant traders here at ET.. especially not the government...
transaction tax= higher fees from brokerages.. much higher due to less transactions.. all of this will force people to buy and hold.. and hold and hold.. just like the stupid day trading Patterd ay trade rules!! they do nothing but hurt the little guy...
Anyway this si being shopped now.. and in a few years when OBAMA needs a bailout for healthcare he will show that a transaction tax on wallstreet will sve the day!!!! what bullcrap.. the transaction tax will not raise that much since most transactions will be reduced by 80 % in my opinion.. so it is yet another tax to those who buy and hold and invest.. anyway this is how taxes get passed.. a year or two they are talked about then they are ..BOOM! right in your face.. LEGAL.
OBAMA's cHANGE IS THA HE IS SHORT CHANGING THE LITTLE GUY ! Also.. not to be racist but .. how many african american hedge fund managers are there?
anyway the idea is out there and now that mom and pop are pissed at "wallstreet" (GREEDY SOB INVESTMENT BANKERS).. but htey blame all of wall street.. so now is the perfect time to punish wall street with a tax.. people will be all for it... no one cares about the little piss ant traders here at ET.. especially not the government...
transaction tax= higher fees from brokerages.. much higher due to less transactions.. all of this will force people to buy and hold.. and hold and hold.. just like the stupid day trading Patterd ay trade rules!! they do nothing but hurt the little guy...
Anyway this si being shopped now.. and in a few years when OBAMA needs a bailout for healthcare he will show that a transaction tax on wallstreet will sve the day!!!! what bullcrap.. the transaction tax will not raise that much since most transactions will be reduced by 80 % in my opinion.. so it is yet another tax to those who buy and hold and invest.. anyway this is how taxes get passed.. a year or two they are talked about then they are ..BOOM! right in your face.. LEGAL.
OBAMA's cHANGE IS THA HE IS SHORT CHANGING THE LITTLE GUY ! Also.. not to be racist but .. how many african american hedge fund managers are there?
This piece mentions a tax of a nickel per $1000 ($50 per million). If this tax ever happened I could live with that amount. It would be like having another SEC fee tacked on. The problem is they could really up the tax if it ever came into being. But it ain't going to happen anyway
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/22/business/global/22inside.html?_r=1
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/22/business/global/22inside.html?_r=1
remember this mike the wall street gurus who this tax is pointing at are gonna be exempt. try selling that to mom and pop guaranteed the only way this gets passed is with no exemptions and obviously we all know that isnt gonna happen. every country that has this tax has an exemption of some sort for the professionals in the industry. so there is a reason why there isnt intense lobbying for the opposition of this tax the powers to be know that it doesnt involve them and they could care less if us citizens take the brunt of it.
Given some of my previous correspondance over the years at CNBC, I would guess that Erin Burnett's e-mail address is the following:
Erin.Burnett@nbcuni.com
Erin.Burnett@nbcuni.com
Quote from Landis82:
Given some of my previous correspondance over the years at CNBC, I would guess that Erin Burnett's e-mail address is the following:
Erin.Burnett@nbcuni.com
Thanks.
PARIS â No longer just a hopeless cause for anti-capitalist activists, the idea of a global tax on financial transactions is gaining ground in Europe.
European Union leaders could not agree to put it on the agenda this week of the Group of 20 summit meeting in Pittsburgh on changing the financial system, but the leaders of France, Germany and the European Commission endorsed the concept.
More strikingly, the head of the British Financial Services Authority, which regulates the worldâs second biggest banking center after New York, said last month that such a levy could help shrink a swollen financial sector.
âIf increased capital requirements are insufficient I am happy to consider taxes on financial transactions â âTobin taxes,ââ the F.S.A. chairman, Adair Turner, told Prospect magazine.
James Tobin, a Nobel prize-winning U.S. economist, first proposed a small levy on currency trading in 1972 to penalize short-term speculation after the United States abandoned the gold standard and floated the dollar.
His idea found no takers then and lay dormant until the Association for the Taxation of Financial Transactions for the Aid of Citizens, an anti-globalization movement based in France, began campaigning for it in the mid-1990s.
In the meantime, the scope of the proposed tax, the policy objective and the proposed beneficiaries had changed.
The French foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, says that he and the British foreign secretary, David Miliband, have agreed to work on a proposal for an âinternational financial contributionâ to fund development assistance. He estimated a voluntary contribution of just 0.005 percent on financial transactions would raise â¬30 billion, or $44.10 billion, a year.
Many key details remain to be worked out, like who would receive and allocate the revenue and for what projects.
A plan will be put to 58 nations at a meeting planned in Paris next month to discuss innovative financing to meet the United Nations Millennium Development Goals. These involve eradicating extreme poverty, hunger and disease, promoting gender equality, health, education and clean water, and reducing child mortality.
In Germany, Social Democrats, junior partners in Chancellor Angela Merkelâs grand coalition, which faces a general election next Sunday, say the proceeds of a Tobin tax should go to meet the costs of bailing out banks in the global financial crisis.
Donât hold your breath. Agreement on such a tax is anything but imminent. Mrs. Merkel, a political conservative, said it would only be feasible if all the worldâs main financial centers agreed to levy it, and there is no sign that the United States is remotely interested.
Mrs. Merkelâs support sounded like lip service, echoing widespread indignation among German voters at U.S. and British financial capitalism, which their leaders have blamed for the crisis.
Critics of the Tobin tax, including the banking and business lobbies, argue that a levy on financial transactions would drive business offshore, reduce trading volumes and liquidity, hit employment in the financial sector, harm shareholders and slow the world economy. They also say it would be hard to collect and easy to evade.
A lot of this is specious special pleading. Of course banks donât want to be taxed on lucrative high frequency trading.
But there is no inherent reason why there should be a tax on buying a car but not on buying a derivatives contract. No one seriously argues that you canât tax cars for fear of killing jobs or driving the auto industry to Singapore or the Cayman Islands.
Moreover, it is hard to see why a fractional tax rate of 5 cents on every $1,000 would seriously impair liquidity.
Britain has long charged stamp duty on share and real estate transactions, while the United States funds its regulators through a tiny levy on transactions.
Mr. Turner of the F.S.A. argues that diminishing the turnover of the financial sector would be a worthwhile objective in itself to reduce the amount of âsocially useless activity.â
Perhaps the most salient criticism is that a Tobin tax would do little or nothing to deter risky financial engineering and excessive leverage.
That is not its purpose.
With Western governments facing huge budget deficits and debt mountains as a result of the crisis, the funds available to help the poorest countries are bound to shrink unless new revenue sources are tapped.
Taxing financial speculation is surely more appealing than raising taxes on income or labor.
Paul Taylor is a Reuters columnist.
European Union leaders could not agree to put it on the agenda this week of the Group of 20 summit meeting in Pittsburgh on changing the financial system, but the leaders of France, Germany and the European Commission endorsed the concept.
More strikingly, the head of the British Financial Services Authority, which regulates the worldâs second biggest banking center after New York, said last month that such a levy could help shrink a swollen financial sector.
âIf increased capital requirements are insufficient I am happy to consider taxes on financial transactions â âTobin taxes,ââ the F.S.A. chairman, Adair Turner, told Prospect magazine.
James Tobin, a Nobel prize-winning U.S. economist, first proposed a small levy on currency trading in 1972 to penalize short-term speculation after the United States abandoned the gold standard and floated the dollar.
His idea found no takers then and lay dormant until the Association for the Taxation of Financial Transactions for the Aid of Citizens, an anti-globalization movement based in France, began campaigning for it in the mid-1990s.
In the meantime, the scope of the proposed tax, the policy objective and the proposed beneficiaries had changed.
The French foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, says that he and the British foreign secretary, David Miliband, have agreed to work on a proposal for an âinternational financial contributionâ to fund development assistance. He estimated a voluntary contribution of just 0.005 percent on financial transactions would raise â¬30 billion, or $44.10 billion, a year.
Many key details remain to be worked out, like who would receive and allocate the revenue and for what projects.
A plan will be put to 58 nations at a meeting planned in Paris next month to discuss innovative financing to meet the United Nations Millennium Development Goals. These involve eradicating extreme poverty, hunger and disease, promoting gender equality, health, education and clean water, and reducing child mortality.
In Germany, Social Democrats, junior partners in Chancellor Angela Merkelâs grand coalition, which faces a general election next Sunday, say the proceeds of a Tobin tax should go to meet the costs of bailing out banks in the global financial crisis.
Donât hold your breath. Agreement on such a tax is anything but imminent. Mrs. Merkel, a political conservative, said it would only be feasible if all the worldâs main financial centers agreed to levy it, and there is no sign that the United States is remotely interested.
Mrs. Merkelâs support sounded like lip service, echoing widespread indignation among German voters at U.S. and British financial capitalism, which their leaders have blamed for the crisis.
Critics of the Tobin tax, including the banking and business lobbies, argue that a levy on financial transactions would drive business offshore, reduce trading volumes and liquidity, hit employment in the financial sector, harm shareholders and slow the world economy. They also say it would be hard to collect and easy to evade.
A lot of this is specious special pleading. Of course banks donât want to be taxed on lucrative high frequency trading.
But there is no inherent reason why there should be a tax on buying a car but not on buying a derivatives contract. No one seriously argues that you canât tax cars for fear of killing jobs or driving the auto industry to Singapore or the Cayman Islands.
Moreover, it is hard to see why a fractional tax rate of 5 cents on every $1,000 would seriously impair liquidity.
Britain has long charged stamp duty on share and real estate transactions, while the United States funds its regulators through a tiny levy on transactions.
Mr. Turner of the F.S.A. argues that diminishing the turnover of the financial sector would be a worthwhile objective in itself to reduce the amount of âsocially useless activity.â
Perhaps the most salient criticism is that a Tobin tax would do little or nothing to deter risky financial engineering and excessive leverage.
That is not its purpose.
With Western governments facing huge budget deficits and debt mountains as a result of the crisis, the funds available to help the poorest countries are bound to shrink unless new revenue sources are tapped.
Taxing financial speculation is surely more appealing than raising taxes on income or labor.
Paul Taylor is a Reuters columnist.
AS leaders of the worldâs largest economies gather today in Pittsburgh for the Group of 20 meeting, people in the worldâs poorest countries will likely look on with a mix of hope and trepidation, wondering whether their needs will figure in the deliberations at all. The G-20 nations could help both the poor and the global economy by fully financing lagging efforts to fight poverty and disease worldwide, and the best way to do this would be to impose a very small tax on the prosperous foreign exchange industry.
The eight United Nations Millennium Development Goals â which include eradicating extreme poverty and hunger, establishing universal primary education, reducing child mortality, improving maternal health and combating AIDS, malaria and other diseases â are meant to be reached by 2015. Morally and practically, the world must try harder to keep these promises. President Obama has made it clear that the United States has, in his words, âa responsibility to protect the health of our people, while saving lives, reducing suffering and supporting the health and dignity of people everywhere.â
Disease takes an enormous toll on economic growth: it sidelines or kills productive workers and causes tremendous suffering. Take, for instance, tuberculosis, an illness that with the right treatment can usually be cured. In 2007, it killed nearly 1.8 million people, more than 600 times the number who have died from H1N1 swine flu. The World Bank estimates that tuberculosis has caused the gross domestic product in some countries to fall as much as 7 percent.
Or consider maternal health. About 530,000 women worldwide die each year from pregnancy-related causes, most of them preventable, and millions more suffer injuries or develop lifelong disabilities. A serious effort to reduce those numbers would bring real economic gains. Improvements in the health of Asian women and children accounted for a significant share of that continentâs economic growth from 1965 to 1990.
Unfortunately, though, there is an enormous shortfall in the level of outside aid needed to reach the goals the world has set. Donor countries, including the wealthiest of the G-20, are providing only 0.3 percent of their combined income in development aid. Although the donor countries have made commitments to provide more money, they are not giving it fast enough to tackle runaway health problems, including the emergence of drug-resistant pathogens that threaten people across the globe.
The one untapped source that could easily provide the amount of money needed is the foreign currency market, which handles almost $800 trillion in trades annually, all of which is untaxed. A tiny levy of 0.005 percent on transactions involving the worldâs most traded currencies â the dollar, the euro, the pound and the yen â would raise more than $33 billion annually for development, while not hurting the market or affecting the average international traveler.
The tax could be collected automatically by the computer system that handles foreign exchange transactions â so it would be easy to put into place, and impossible to evade. And because not all currencies would be taxed, only the countries whose currencies would be affected would need to consent. France already supports the idea, and Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany has signaled her willingness to consider it.
We have already seen what innovative taxation can do to save lives, with sufficient political will. Since 2005, France and 10 other countries have collected a small tax on airline tickets (in France, it amounts to only $1 to $5 per ticket). And this has, without hurting the airline industry, raised about $700 million â enough to finance three-quarters of the AIDS treatment now being received by the worldâs H.I.V.-positive children. Unitaid, the international organization that I lead and that manages the money from the airline tax, has also been able to negotiate 50 percent to 60 percent reductions in the price of pediatric anti-retroviral drugs in low-income countries.
How should the proceeds of a foreign exchange transaction tax be managed? One model is the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, which holds medical programs in more than 100 countries to high performance standards, and can withhold financing when money is not used properly.
The banking industry has so far managed to keep currency trading untaxed, but this industry, which has so recently been dependent on government aid, has a duty to give back. President Obama has reminded Wall Street leaders about what he called their âobligation to the goal of wider recovery, a more stable system and a more broadly shared prosperity.â The same principle applies internationally. President Obama and other G-20 leaders should harness the mighty foreign exchange market in the service of better health for all.
Philippe Douste-Blazy, the French foreign minister from 2005 to 2007, is the chairman of Unitaid and a special adviser to the United Nations secretary general on innovative financing.
The eight United Nations Millennium Development Goals â which include eradicating extreme poverty and hunger, establishing universal primary education, reducing child mortality, improving maternal health and combating AIDS, malaria and other diseases â are meant to be reached by 2015. Morally and practically, the world must try harder to keep these promises. President Obama has made it clear that the United States has, in his words, âa responsibility to protect the health of our people, while saving lives, reducing suffering and supporting the health and dignity of people everywhere.â
Disease takes an enormous toll on economic growth: it sidelines or kills productive workers and causes tremendous suffering. Take, for instance, tuberculosis, an illness that with the right treatment can usually be cured. In 2007, it killed nearly 1.8 million people, more than 600 times the number who have died from H1N1 swine flu. The World Bank estimates that tuberculosis has caused the gross domestic product in some countries to fall as much as 7 percent.
Or consider maternal health. About 530,000 women worldwide die each year from pregnancy-related causes, most of them preventable, and millions more suffer injuries or develop lifelong disabilities. A serious effort to reduce those numbers would bring real economic gains. Improvements in the health of Asian women and children accounted for a significant share of that continentâs economic growth from 1965 to 1990.
Unfortunately, though, there is an enormous shortfall in the level of outside aid needed to reach the goals the world has set. Donor countries, including the wealthiest of the G-20, are providing only 0.3 percent of their combined income in development aid. Although the donor countries have made commitments to provide more money, they are not giving it fast enough to tackle runaway health problems, including the emergence of drug-resistant pathogens that threaten people across the globe.
The one untapped source that could easily provide the amount of money needed is the foreign currency market, which handles almost $800 trillion in trades annually, all of which is untaxed. A tiny levy of 0.005 percent on transactions involving the worldâs most traded currencies â the dollar, the euro, the pound and the yen â would raise more than $33 billion annually for development, while not hurting the market or affecting the average international traveler.
The tax could be collected automatically by the computer system that handles foreign exchange transactions â so it would be easy to put into place, and impossible to evade. And because not all currencies would be taxed, only the countries whose currencies would be affected would need to consent. France already supports the idea, and Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany has signaled her willingness to consider it.
We have already seen what innovative taxation can do to save lives, with sufficient political will. Since 2005, France and 10 other countries have collected a small tax on airline tickets (in France, it amounts to only $1 to $5 per ticket). And this has, without hurting the airline industry, raised about $700 million â enough to finance three-quarters of the AIDS treatment now being received by the worldâs H.I.V.-positive children. Unitaid, the international organization that I lead and that manages the money from the airline tax, has also been able to negotiate 50 percent to 60 percent reductions in the price of pediatric anti-retroviral drugs in low-income countries.
How should the proceeds of a foreign exchange transaction tax be managed? One model is the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, which holds medical programs in more than 100 countries to high performance standards, and can withhold financing when money is not used properly.
The banking industry has so far managed to keep currency trading untaxed, but this industry, which has so recently been dependent on government aid, has a duty to give back. President Obama has reminded Wall Street leaders about what he called their âobligation to the goal of wider recovery, a more stable system and a more broadly shared prosperity.â The same principle applies internationally. President Obama and other G-20 leaders should harness the mighty foreign exchange market in the service of better health for all.
Philippe Douste-Blazy, the French foreign minister from 2005 to 2007, is the chairman of Unitaid and a special adviser to the United Nations secretary general on innovative financing.