I would like to see you jump off the Empire State Building head first.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_State_Building
1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today
- Thread starter seasideheights
- Start date
I would like to see you jump off the Empire State Building head first.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_State_Building
I don't get what you're saying, are you saying you think this will be good for people who play the spread?Quote from Arnie:
I love it!!
Spreads will w......i.......d.........e........n
Mo money, mo money, mo money!!!
I can just hear some idiot on the phone with his broker......."whadaya mean you can't get a bid?" "Sell the GD stock, damnit!"
Rules change, you adapt.
Very nice article here.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/114...reduce-liquidity-on-u-s-markets-terrible-idea
http://seekingalpha.com/article/114...reduce-liquidity-on-u-s-markets-terrible-idea
I spoke with the CME and ICE yesterday; they had no official comments yet.
The same was true Regarding Tradestation, Global Futures and E*TRADE, who said "it was only speculation at the time being and they could not comment, but they were very much aware of it and following the developments very closely". Which is correct, but there's a new man in town and a new Congress.
I also spoke with the FIA, Futures Industry Association. They managed to repeal the $97 million dollar tax on futures last year (and they worked hard - again), but times are different now. They need members, so if your company could join, it would be great. Drop them an email when you have time with your comments regarding the tax.
They would also like as many traders as possible to join the 34th Annual International Futures Industry Conference in Boca Raton on March 11-14th to give their support against this measure. There will be members of Congress, regulatory officials and congressional staff at the meeting. http://www.futuresindustry.org/boca-2009.asp
I might go, if anyone else is considering, please let me know. I do not trade stocks, so I don't know if they have something similar, but if someone knows anything, please post.
We are not the only ones at risk. All our brokers, the companies managing other peopleâs money trading, the companies teaching other people how to trade. A lot of people affected will be out of a job. There is a whole chain that will be affected by this in these dire times if it goes though in its current form.
Congress and Taxes
I believe that now is the time we all need to take action. We can't just sit and wait and say either "It won't get passed" or "If it is passed, it will be repealed". What if it doesnât get repealed? OR what if it takes 8 years for it to get repealed? And Yes, Obama is from Chicago, but is that enough?
Remember, it is really simple to get a tax implemented when the Congress in run by Democrats. But to kill it once in effect, is another story. Once anything starts generating money to the treasury, more people will approve of it. Remember, the Alternative Minimum Tax and how many times it has been subject to termination. It is still there, and most people in Congress even agree it is bad, but it generates a lot of money.
Instead it keeps getting modified, but not removed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_Minimum_Tax
With the numbers from the Barackobama.com site it is obvious that in its current form, NOBODY is exempt. This means hedge funds and Goldman will pay the same tax percentage as we do. We need to have the big boys join us against this tax, and not to have them join the government in reducing their burden of the tax. If their burden were to be reduced, it would completely invalidate the whole anti-speculation agenda and would tax the average American instead, while at the same time, severely reduce the amount generated from the tax. The same article even takes into account declining volume, for them the purpose is only to collect tax, with whatever effect it may have.
BarackObama.com post regarding tax
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/earlearthworm/gGg4mk
You have to read this article as well:
Can you imagine
- no longer logging in to your Tradestation, XTrader or IB account every morning (or whatever you may use).
- that all the great trader books at Amazon such as "Market Wizards" and "Mastering the Trade" will no longer be top sellers as they are "outdated" and everyone is supposed to be an investor now for the long term, dictated by the government.
- to no longer be reading many of the great trader blogs out there, because they no longer gets updated.
- that the ones that are trying to become traders all fail rather fast, because it has become too expensive to even try. America's risk taking culture will be severely impacted.
All of this because the government decided that what you were doing, was really bad. Yet it has created wealth for the past 100+ years - for those that succeeded. For those that didn't, they merely pumped money into the markets and provided liquidity.
Naturally this is a worst case scenario, but so is the proposal to tax so massively.
The same was true Regarding Tradestation, Global Futures and E*TRADE, who said "it was only speculation at the time being and they could not comment, but they were very much aware of it and following the developments very closely". Which is correct, but there's a new man in town and a new Congress.
I also spoke with the FIA, Futures Industry Association. They managed to repeal the $97 million dollar tax on futures last year (and they worked hard - again), but times are different now. They need members, so if your company could join, it would be great. Drop them an email when you have time with your comments regarding the tax.
They would also like as many traders as possible to join the 34th Annual International Futures Industry Conference in Boca Raton on March 11-14th to give their support against this measure. There will be members of Congress, regulatory officials and congressional staff at the meeting. http://www.futuresindustry.org/boca-2009.asp
I might go, if anyone else is considering, please let me know. I do not trade stocks, so I don't know if they have something similar, but if someone knows anything, please post.
We are not the only ones at risk. All our brokers, the companies managing other peopleâs money trading, the companies teaching other people how to trade. A lot of people affected will be out of a job. There is a whole chain that will be affected by this in these dire times if it goes though in its current form.
Congress and Taxes
I believe that now is the time we all need to take action. We can't just sit and wait and say either "It won't get passed" or "If it is passed, it will be repealed". What if it doesnât get repealed? OR what if it takes 8 years for it to get repealed? And Yes, Obama is from Chicago, but is that enough?
Remember, it is really simple to get a tax implemented when the Congress in run by Democrats. But to kill it once in effect, is another story. Once anything starts generating money to the treasury, more people will approve of it. Remember, the Alternative Minimum Tax and how many times it has been subject to termination. It is still there, and most people in Congress even agree it is bad, but it generates a lot of money.
Instead it keeps getting modified, but not removed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_Minimum_Tax
With the numbers from the Barackobama.com site it is obvious that in its current form, NOBODY is exempt. This means hedge funds and Goldman will pay the same tax percentage as we do. We need to have the big boys join us against this tax, and not to have them join the government in reducing their burden of the tax. If their burden were to be reduced, it would completely invalidate the whole anti-speculation agenda and would tax the average American instead, while at the same time, severely reduce the amount generated from the tax. The same article even takes into account declining volume, for them the purpose is only to collect tax, with whatever effect it may have.
BarackObama.com post regarding tax
http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/earlearthworm/gGg4mk
You have to read this article as well:
Can you imagine
- no longer logging in to your Tradestation, XTrader or IB account every morning (or whatever you may use).
- that all the great trader books at Amazon such as "Market Wizards" and "Mastering the Trade" will no longer be top sellers as they are "outdated" and everyone is supposed to be an investor now for the long term, dictated by the government.
- to no longer be reading many of the great trader blogs out there, because they no longer gets updated.
- that the ones that are trying to become traders all fail rather fast, because it has become too expensive to even try. America's risk taking culture will be severely impacted.
All of this because the government decided that what you were doing, was really bad. Yet it has created wealth for the past 100+ years - for those that succeeded. For those that didn't, they merely pumped money into the markets and provided liquidity.
Naturally this is a worst case scenario, but so is the proposal to tax so massively.
This is not worth debating with you. But, since you come from a political background; can you provide a link or reference showing that it would take 68 yes votes in the senate to pass? After all, it only takes 67 votes (2/3rds) to pass a constitutional amendment after 3/4ths of the states pass it. Why would a bill require more senate votes than a constitutional amendment?
Thanks. There is no mention of requiring 68 votes in the Senate to pass a bill.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/114...reduce-liquidity-on-u-s-markets-terrible-idea
Why is it that people with no understanding of financial markets feel compelled to offer solutions to what they perceive as problems?
This recent New York Times opinion article suggests that a transaction tax to reduce liquidity of US markets would be a good thing. Not so. People from all over the world use the US markets precisely because of the high liquidity and small transactional costs, ultimately to the benefit of the American economy. The stock exchanges, brokers, market participants, retirement funds, large investors, and mom-and-pop investors all reap the rewards of one of the most welcoming markets in the world. Clearly, the long term consequences of a transaction tax have not been considered. With this transaction tax, all investors, from the large institutions to the mom-and-pop hundred share lots, would pay more upon buying and receive less upon selling.
As an example, compare three or four stocks that trade between 100,000 to 500,000 shares per day with stocks that trade 5 million shares per day. First, you will notice that the bid and ask spread is much larger and thinner in the lower volume stocks. Second, you will find that when there is a large buy or sell order, the price of the stock moves proportionately further than with the higher volume stocks. Obviously, those in favor of the tax have not realized the magnitude of this indirect transactional cost. Even scarier, the stress of these additional costs to investors could drive their interests to the markets of other countries. New York is already faced with stiff competition from London and other locations that would love to have the markets we now enjoy. Do we really want more layoffs and higher office vacancies in New York City? How about Chicago?
I am also troubled by the notion that participating in the markets is a nonproductive activity. It's akin to saying that a journalist is engaged in a nonproductive activity or being a soldier is a nonproductive activity. Providing companies with easy and inexpensive access to working capital is, in my mind, extremely productive and crucial to a healthy capitalist economy. The increased cost to those investing in American companies would also be passed to the consumer, yet another negative economic consequence not mentioned in the Times opinion article.
What we need now is an intelligent discussion of how we can increase wealth in this country without taxing business sectors out of existence, especially businesses that lubricate the wheels of wealth building to promote capitalism. If we destroy what is left of the free market in the United States, what will be left to pass along to our children besides mountains of debt?
Let us not be so quick to âtax the other guyâ as we all know what goes around comes around in an environment that is seeking to punish someone else.
Why is it that people with no understanding of financial markets feel compelled to offer solutions to what they perceive as problems?
This recent New York Times opinion article suggests that a transaction tax to reduce liquidity of US markets would be a good thing. Not so. People from all over the world use the US markets precisely because of the high liquidity and small transactional costs, ultimately to the benefit of the American economy. The stock exchanges, brokers, market participants, retirement funds, large investors, and mom-and-pop investors all reap the rewards of one of the most welcoming markets in the world. Clearly, the long term consequences of a transaction tax have not been considered. With this transaction tax, all investors, from the large institutions to the mom-and-pop hundred share lots, would pay more upon buying and receive less upon selling.
As an example, compare three or four stocks that trade between 100,000 to 500,000 shares per day with stocks that trade 5 million shares per day. First, you will notice that the bid and ask spread is much larger and thinner in the lower volume stocks. Second, you will find that when there is a large buy or sell order, the price of the stock moves proportionately further than with the higher volume stocks. Obviously, those in favor of the tax have not realized the magnitude of this indirect transactional cost. Even scarier, the stress of these additional costs to investors could drive their interests to the markets of other countries. New York is already faced with stiff competition from London and other locations that would love to have the markets we now enjoy. Do we really want more layoffs and higher office vacancies in New York City? How about Chicago?
I am also troubled by the notion that participating in the markets is a nonproductive activity. It's akin to saying that a journalist is engaged in a nonproductive activity or being a soldier is a nonproductive activity. Providing companies with easy and inexpensive access to working capital is, in my mind, extremely productive and crucial to a healthy capitalist economy. The increased cost to those investing in American companies would also be passed to the consumer, yet another negative economic consequence not mentioned in the Times opinion article.
What we need now is an intelligent discussion of how we can increase wealth in this country without taxing business sectors out of existence, especially businesses that lubricate the wheels of wealth building to promote capitalism. If we destroy what is left of the free market in the United States, what will be left to pass along to our children besides mountains of debt?
Let us not be so quick to âtax the other guyâ as we all know what goes around comes around in an environment that is seeking to punish someone else.