Ooohhh so scared.
Everyone run from the evil Libs.
Get a clue Bud.
Everyone run from the evil Libs.
Get a clue Bud.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today
- Thread starter seasideheights
- Start date
<i>Once he locks up that next term in office, then you will see his true, radical ass come out of the woodwork. I mean, someone's going to have to pay for the trillions of dollars it will take for that ridiculous universal health care bullshit that he wants, and will more than likely get.</i>
Just for the record; we will end up spending more for the war in Iraq than on whatever new health care proposal is approved.
Just for the record; we will end up spending more for the war in Iraq than on whatever new health care proposal is approved.
Quote from jj69:
Sen. Arlen Specter switches sides to become Democrat. This means Senate is now filibuster-proof. This means there's some radical shit coming down the pike from the left, especially in regards to taxes as they need to pay for the Obama budget. Things are surely falling into place one by one(and it's only a question of when as to Geithner going back for more bailout money) counting down to the trans tax becoming inevitable. Can anything be done to derail this looming crisis(for us)?
They could always hike the top rate of income tax to 50% like they have in the UK.
Look, (and i have said this stuff in the early days of this thread, but i will do so again for all the US based traders), in the Uk there is already a stamp duty on stock transactions, but very few active traders and institutions pay it. How is this? There is a thriving swap business( typically called 'Contracts For Difference'). As an independant trader, you trade a swap with your broker as the counterparty, and the broker trades the stock in the market (anyone with market maker status at the exchange , such as the broker, is typically stamp duty exempt ). There are some bucket shop brokers who quote you a spread to trade, but many more where the mechanics of trading the swap are exactly the same as trading the stock. The broker will charge you a little steep on funding usually, but hey, its a LOT better than paying stamp. Remember, no one who is an active trader in UK stocks ever pays stamp duty....a fact that is often overlooked.
Also, congress commisioned a report back in 2004 which looked at a trans tax, and their revenue estimates were way short of what dickheads like Dean Baker and others are pushing. In fact here it is http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL32266_20041202.pdf . The report basically knocked it on the head.
Quote from jj69:
Sen. Arlen Specter switches sides to become Democrat. This means Senate is now filibuster-proof. This means there's some radical shit coming down the pike from the left, especially in regards to taxes as they need to pay for the Obama budget. Things are surely falling into place one by one(and it's only a question of when as to Geithner going back for more bailout money) counting down to the trans tax becoming inevitable. Can anything be done to derail this looming crisis(for us)?
I don't like Specter switching sides one bit. Also they are going to be jamming a healthcare reform bill down our throats this year and there isn't anything the GOP can do to stop it. I just hope (and pray) that the healtcare reform bill doesn't have a transaction tax funding component to it (ala HR 676). I don't think the trans tax bill would ever pass on it's own but attaching it to something like a healthcare bill isn't out of the question...
-Guru
Quote from zzt:
They could always hike the top rate of income tax to 50% like they have in the UK.
Look, (and i have said this stuff in the early days of this thread, but i will do so again for all the US based traders), in the Uk there is already a stamp duty on stock transactions, but very few active traders and institutions pay it. How is this? There is a thriving swap business( typically called 'Contracts For Difference'). As an independant trader, you trade a swap with your broker as the counterparty, and the broker trades the stock in the market (anyone with market maker status at the exchange , such as the broker, is typically stamp duty exempt ). There are some bucket shop brokers who quote you a spread to trade, but many more where the mechanics of trading the swap are exactly the same as trading the stock. The broker will charge you a little steep on funding usually, but hey, its a LOT better than paying stamp. Remember, no one who is an active trader in UK stocks ever pays stamp duty....a fact that is often overlooked.
Also, congress commisioned a report back in 2004 which looked at a trans tax, and their revenue estimates were way short of what dickheads like Dean Baker and others are pushing. In fact here it is http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL32266_20041202.pdf . The report basically knocked it on the head.
If cfds were allowed here I wouldn't worry so much. But currently they are illegal in US except for gold and forex. Who knows if they would be allowed post-tax. There's also talk of eventual arrival of global currency. And this could put an end to liquid fx trading as we know it.
Like I said before, if this tax were to happen prior to the next presidential election, then Obama will only serve one term. Plus, there are senate Democrats who's main constituents are in the financial sector, such as Sen. Charles Schumer-NY. If this tax were allowed to be initiated, then this will no doubt allow the Republicans to mount a huge comeback, make significant gains in congress which will then make Obama powerless, and eventually get the white house back.
As of right now, the Democrats have 59 senate seats, and if Franken get's seated, they will have the filibuster proof majority of 60. However, Obama and the Democrats know this number will not hold up, especially after the 2010 elections, when several senate seats will be up for grabs. History has shown that America likes a fair and "balanced" government, which is why I fully expect the Republicans to make significant ground in the 2010 senate elections. Why do you think Obama is moving so fast in attempting to get everything done at once??? Because he knows he won't have these congressional majorities for much longer.
As of right now, the Democrats have 59 senate seats, and if Franken get's seated, they will have the filibuster proof majority of 60. However, Obama and the Democrats know this number will not hold up, especially after the 2010 elections, when several senate seats will be up for grabs. History has shown that America likes a fair and "balanced" government, which is why I fully expect the Republicans to make significant ground in the 2010 senate elections. Why do you think Obama is moving so fast in attempting to get everything done at once??? Because he knows he won't have these congressional majorities for much longer.
<i>History has shown that America likes a fair and "balanced" government, which is why I fully expect the Republicans to make significant ground in the 2010 senate elections. </i>
I doubt it, at least for 2010. The Republicans have to defend 19 seats, while the Dems only have to defend 16 seats. The math simply doesn't work this time around.
The Dems have a decent chance of actually adding to their 59 (soon to be 60) seats in the senate. They have a good chance in states like KY, NH, MO, LA and OH where the GOP has either incumbents that have retired or just poor incumbents. The only reasonable pick-up the Republicans might get is in CO.
In 2012, on the other hand, is when the Republicans have a great chance to finally make some ground. This is because at that time the Dems will have to defend many more seats than the Republicans since the Dems had such a good year in 2006.
I doubt it, at least for 2010. The Republicans have to defend 19 seats, while the Dems only have to defend 16 seats. The math simply doesn't work this time around.
The Dems have a decent chance of actually adding to their 59 (soon to be 60) seats in the senate. They have a good chance in states like KY, NH, MO, LA and OH where the GOP has either incumbents that have retired or just poor incumbents. The only reasonable pick-up the Republicans might get is in CO.
In 2012, on the other hand, is when the Republicans have a great chance to finally make some ground. This is because at that time the Dems will have to defend many more seats than the Republicans since the Dems had such a good year in 2006.
Quote from JOSEF:
<i>History has shown that America likes a fair and "balanced" government, which is why I fully expect the Republicans to make significant ground in the 2010 senate elections. </i>
I doubt it, at least for 2010. The Republicans have to defend 19 seats, while the Dems only have to defend 16 seats. The math simply doesn't work this time around.
The Dems have a decent chance of actually adding to their 59 (soon to be 60) seats in the senate. They have a good chance in states like KY, NH, MO, LA and OH where the GOP has either incumbents that have retired or just poor incumbents. The only reasonable pick-up the Republicans might get is in CO.
In 2012, on the other hand, is when the Republicans have a great chance to finally make some ground. This is because at that time the Dems will have to defend many more seats than the Republicans since the Dems had such a good year in 2006.
Agreed, but if the Democrats pass a financial transaction tax to pay for this health care proposal, or even TARP, then they will no doubt lose some seats in 2010. The Democrats seem to forget that there are millions of (voting) people in country that day trade, and their livelihood's would be severely affected by a tax on their trading. These people already pay more than their share in taxes, so it would be grave mistake for the Democrats to even remotely try passing something like this. If they do, there downfall will come much sooner than later!
For now the bill states, well atleast the healthcare bill , says stock and bond transactions no mention of futures or forex. But this bill has been in existence the last few congressional sessions to no avail. I wouldnt worry yet. Also take a look at recent article this week by barney frank is going to submit a bill to reverse the ban on online gambling. It was the rebulicans that killed online gambling. I voted republican but I support the reversal of the ban and never supported that ban. It allowed me to trade how I wanted in different instruments overseas we didnt have here. I spread betted-traded before that was in effect in London and different countries and I live in the US and am a US citizen . So if by some miracle a tranny tax is put through then there is the alternative. Which is a great alternative anyways. Dennis Kucinich is part of this hr 676 bill and he is a whackjob.
Quote from rsikit:
For now the bill states, well atleast the healthcare bill , says stock and bond transactions no mention of futures or forex. But this bill has been in existence the last few congressional sessions to no avail. I wouldnt worry yet. Also take a look at recent article this week by barney frank is going to submit a bill to reverse the ban on online gambling. It was the rebulicans that killed online gambling. I voted republican but I support the reversal of the ban and never supported that ban. It allowed me to trade how I wanted in different instruments overseas we didnt have here. I spread betted-traded before that was in effect in London and different countries and I live in the US and am a US citizen . So if by some miracle a tranny tax is put through then there is the alternative. Which is a great alternative anyways. Dennis Kucinich is part of this hr 676 bill and he is a whackjob.
I don't think HR 676 (the Universal Healthcare bill) put forth by John Conyers is going to be in play. It sounds like Max Baucus of Montana and Edward Kennedy are going to draft the new healthcare bills. I've heard no mention of a trans tax likely being in either of these proposals (let's hope it stays that way).
-Guru