lol. Of course this guy has no source for when he says Obama wants this tax. Obviously, this guy is writing an opinion on a political blog. lol If Obama truly supports this tax, it would be plastered over every web site, and would be non-stop chatter on CNBC, MSNBC, CNN, CBS, and the liberal like networks. It hasn't, so I don't believe one word this guy says.
1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today
- Thread starter seasideheights
- Start date
lol. Of course this guy has no source for when he says Obama wants this tax. Obviously, this guy is writing an opinion on a political blog. lol If Obama truly supports this tax, it would be plastered over every web site, and would be non-stop chatter on CNBC, MSNBC, CNN, CBS, and the liberal like networks. It hasn't, so I don't believe one word this guy says.
Something important to keep in mind.
This fight will never be won.
The idea, if not implemented now, will be brought up going forward again & again as we've seen from the likes of Mr Defazio & Dean Baker for the past several years & by others for decades.
The goal is to once again silence the talk about this tax to prevent its implementation in an era of irrational rage towards anyone with a brokerage account.
Creating a forest fire out of a spark won't help the cause.
Defazio's latest foray doesn't have much more support in way of co-sponsors than his prior attempts.
Speaking out against the tax to the press & Washington DC is exactly what this thread was designed to accomplish. But it must be very targeted.
Increasing the volume of the debate outside of direct communication with Washington DC or direct communication with press articles only helps our opponents by disseminating the idea to more of the general public than would have otherwise known about the idea. This helps our opponent's cause & helps keep the idea in play.
There could be a time to go after public support, but it's not now. In fact it may never be necessary with the latest Defazio attempt. Remember, it wasn't necessary in his prior attempts in order for us to assist in shutting it down.
At this point, following the latest bill, seeing what committee(s) the bill is currently sitting & emailing every person on those committees with our best anti-tax reasoning & judging their stance based on their feedback is key to shutting this tax down. The bill goes nowhere if it doesn't make it thru those committees first.
Please ensure that actions taken, even with the best of intentions, don't counterproductively spread the word about the tax instead of assisting to ensure that the tax is quietly shelved so we can return to our trading livelihoods. That's the goal.
This fight will never be won.
The idea, if not implemented now, will be brought up going forward again & again as we've seen from the likes of Mr Defazio & Dean Baker for the past several years & by others for decades.
The goal is to once again silence the talk about this tax to prevent its implementation in an era of irrational rage towards anyone with a brokerage account.
Creating a forest fire out of a spark won't help the cause.
Defazio's latest foray doesn't have much more support in way of co-sponsors than his prior attempts.
Speaking out against the tax to the press & Washington DC is exactly what this thread was designed to accomplish. But it must be very targeted.
Increasing the volume of the debate outside of direct communication with Washington DC or direct communication with press articles only helps our opponents by disseminating the idea to more of the general public than would have otherwise known about the idea. This helps our opponent's cause & helps keep the idea in play.
There could be a time to go after public support, but it's not now. In fact it may never be necessary with the latest Defazio attempt. Remember, it wasn't necessary in his prior attempts in order for us to assist in shutting it down.
At this point, following the latest bill, seeing what committee(s) the bill is currently sitting & emailing every person on those committees with our best anti-tax reasoning & judging their stance based on their feedback is key to shutting this tax down. The bill goes nowhere if it doesn't make it thru those committees first.
Please ensure that actions taken, even with the best of intentions, don't counterproductively spread the word about the tax instead of assisting to ensure that the tax is quietly shelved so we can return to our trading livelihoods. That's the goal.
The day DeFazio has ceased representing Oregon will be our version of watching Gorbechev on television declaring the USSR was finished. This is our cold war, so long as that threat, and it's principle proponent is in power, you are right this war will not be won. The leading accolytes of this damn tax have to go.
DeFazio will be a tough nut to crack. I've been told he's in a safe House seat. Yet is this true? This man has managed to piss off Obama and Emmanual. Are they not, secretly at least, wishing this man replaced by another Democrat? And if not a Democrat, how about the Republicans?
Then there is DeFazio's allies. Harkin is a late comer who put is finger to the wind and noticed a populist gust. Harkin is, as far as I can tell, in a safe Senate seat. But he represents an agricultural state, we need our folks in the grain complex to have a talk with him. And we need to include the small farmer in this. He needs to see that it isn't Wall Street that would pay, but Iowa.
Then we have the lieutenants to this mad army.
Cosponsors:
Michael Arcuri [D-NY24]
Bruce Braley [D-IA1]
John Conyers [D-MI14]
Elijah Cummings [D-MD7]
Lincoln Davis [D-TN4]
Donna Edwards [D-MD4]
Bob Filner [D-CA51]
Raul Grijalva [D-AZ7]
Phil Hare [D-IL17]
Alcee Hastings [D-FL23]
Maurice Hinchey [D-NY22]
Mazie Hirono [D-HI2]
Henry Johnson [D-GA4]
Steve Kagen [D-WI8]
Marcy Kaptur [D-OH9]
Zoe Lofgren [D-CA16]
Ed Perlmutter [D-CO7]
Thomas Perriello [D-VA5]
Nick Rahall [D-WV3]
Timothy Ryan [D-OH17]
John Sarbanes [D-MD3]
Janice Schakowsky [D-IL9]
Carol Shea-Porter [D-NH1]
Louise Slaughter [D-NY28]
Fortney Stark [D-CA13]
Betty Sutton [D-OH13]
Peter Welch [D-VT]
A lot of these idiots believe their area they represent has nothing to do with Wall Street. Sadly, many are very senior and powerful members that could keep this alive (like my rep, Schakowsky). Yet most of them have to be reminded that while the NYSE or the CME may not be in their backyard, the industry the are involved in is. There are companies in those districts who rely on capital investment. They need to be reminded that such capital, should the employers of their voters needed, may not be there. Nor for investing in new projects either.
Let's pick two of the most relatively remote to finance area reps, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii and John Conyers of Dearborn, MI. These two numbskulls should realize that any disruption in liquidity in capital markets will hit them the most.
Rep. Hirono represents all of Hawaii. Hawaii's main industry is tourism. Tourism requires loans and investment capital for hotels and resorts. Hawaii is also one hell of a user of municipal markets. While H.R. 4191 doesn't tax municipal bonds or debt (yet), it does against insurance for such. You can't tell me we aren't heading into rocky times with regards with that market. Lenders, especially big lenders, will want some sort of insurance. Well, they demand a higher rate if they need to cover any tax for a CDS on municipals. Then there is the income tax situation. Recently it was reported that tax revenue would be down 2.5%, adding $40 million to the state budget's deficit. This tax would be another nail on the foundation on a boat for whatever folks living off investments to get the hell out of there. The weather may be nice there, but it's also nice in other places. As many have noted, these taxes will eat up capital. Last but not least, there are the agri industry in Hawaii. So what is the largest crop? If you said sugar, you're wrong, it's coffee. Coffee prices need to be hedged. But like the corn farmer, the tax will screw over the coffee grower as well. Why bother growing in this high tax state when they can go elsewhere?
With regards to Representative John Conyers, I've always wondered if his district didn't encompass so much of Detroit, if this bum would even be in office. I call him a bum because he's the same guy who mocked folks asking him to read the healthcare bill (there's a video of him saying in a sarcastic tone "read the bill", and another of him saying he doesn't have the time). This man represents a district, which outside of a few cities in his district, represents an industrial wasteland. There is a reason they are filming the urban fight scenes for the remake for Red Dawn over there. The thing is, if there ever was an area that would benefit from capital investment, it's his district. The domestic car companies are barely surviving. Of course the big talk is green jobs. Well as all of you know (maybe not Loufah), you need investors and entrapaneurs. Would they even bother risking if when that green company making say windmills has an IPO, that IPO fails? Because it would, unless the government buys the shares. Investors aren't going to take the risks. The same would go for any start up. Investors eventually want to cash out and redeploy capital, it's what they do if they're successful. Conyers, in supporting this tax, is aborting his own district's economic rebirth.
Speaking of Conyers, his wife Monica pled guilty to accepting bribes while sitting on the Detroit, or I call it Detoilet City Council. She is to be sentenced in Detroit Federal Court on March 10, 2010. She faces 3-5 years in prison.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...ozyuRQHczY7QiYviw&sig2=djEpKQ1kRuIAjKlwWctjEQ
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...xJiXZxuuvYO4qcOng&sig2=Df9wkAAPpAB5QktfErewUQ
It's been on CNBC quite a few times. They've interviewed the "Faz" at least once.
Some are just having their transaction tax venting session. We've all had them, myself included. Obviously, we are all concerned about it, although the odds of it actually not happening are still in our favor. Everyone in here is doing a good job of contacting their reps. in Congress. There are 27 co-sponsors for this tax bill in the House, but as far as I can recall, it's been that same number of co-sponsors for a while, which is good news. There are many Dems. in the House that reportedly do not support it. Some have actually drafted letters/proposals saying what a bad idea this tax is. Even the Democratic House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer came out and said he would not support a transaction tax proposal unless it were first implemented globally.
There are 435 members in the House of Representatives, and only 27 co-sponsor this transaction tax bill. That's not so bad, although I know we'd all prefer there be no bill at all. Hopefully, it doesn't pick up anymore co-sponsors, and dies a quick death. Hey, one can hope right? lol
http://www.advancedtrading.com/regulations/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=222002855
"The situation, of course, is not so simple. According to a 2004 study by Jonathan Schwabish of Partnership for New York, the FTT would result in a "substantial" collateral damage to the economy. Per Dr. Schwabish's estimates, if the FTT results in even as little as 10% decrease in trading volume on the exchanges, New York City alone would be shedding as many as 10,000 financial securities professionals.
While this number may seem lost in the total U.S. population count, consider the following statistic: every 100 financial security jobs are estimated to support 27 to 37 jobs in the retail sector, 72 to 91 jobs in the business services sector (think staples and copy machines), 79 to 112 jobs in the services sector (like dentists, nurses and gas station operators), and 5 to 12 restaurant and pub workers. Even the smallest FTT that reduces transaction volume by as little as 10% will, according to Dr. Schwabish, result in the loss of over 30,000 jobs just in NYC."
"U.S. trading may move to foreign soils. Sweden and Japan have already experienced emigration of traders in response to transaction taxes. In Sweden, 30% of the country's trading volume moved to London after the Swedes imposed a 2% trading tax in 1984 (the tax was repealed in 1991). Japan had to stop taxing financial transactions in 1999 when the government found that the level of tax excessive to that charged by other countries (0% at the time in the U.S.) is likely to result in the Japanese financial markets moving away from Japan altogether."
"The situation, of course, is not so simple. According to a 2004 study by Jonathan Schwabish of Partnership for New York, the FTT would result in a "substantial" collateral damage to the economy. Per Dr. Schwabish's estimates, if the FTT results in even as little as 10% decrease in trading volume on the exchanges, New York City alone would be shedding as many as 10,000 financial securities professionals.
While this number may seem lost in the total U.S. population count, consider the following statistic: every 100 financial security jobs are estimated to support 27 to 37 jobs in the retail sector, 72 to 91 jobs in the business services sector (think staples and copy machines), 79 to 112 jobs in the services sector (like dentists, nurses and gas station operators), and 5 to 12 restaurant and pub workers. Even the smallest FTT that reduces transaction volume by as little as 10% will, according to Dr. Schwabish, result in the loss of over 30,000 jobs just in NYC."
"U.S. trading may move to foreign soils. Sweden and Japan have already experienced emigration of traders in response to transaction taxes. In Sweden, 30% of the country's trading volume moved to London after the Swedes imposed a 2% trading tax in 1984 (the tax was repealed in 1991). Japan had to stop taxing financial transactions in 1999 when the government found that the level of tax excessive to that charged by other countries (0% at the time in the U.S.) is likely to result in the Japanese financial markets moving away from Japan altogether."