1/4% Tax on all stock trades pushed in NY Times today

[hippie]

Quote from rew:

On stocks the 0.25% tax is equivalent to tripling my commission costs. On forex, if that 0.25% is on the amount of money controlled, it makes short term forex trades unviable. The point of this tax is to kill off traders, who were not responsible for the financial crisis.

Traders gets no bailout when they blow their accounts. This tax on retail tradders made sense only if traders get downside protection similar to Goldman, etc.


Retail traders/ active investors are Main Street, Not Wall street. Please write Congress and (esp the committee members on this tax) about it even if you aready sign the petition.

 

[FightTheFuture]

Another promoting the trans tax on a Time. com blog.

And he admits he doesn't know crap, but knows the trans tax will fix everything:

Soak the Bankers, Joe Klein

"I've never been very interested in business news, always had difficulty remembering........"

http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/01/14/soak-the-bankers/?xid=rss-topstories

 

[rc822]

If this bank tax has difficulty passing the Senate, then it's time for Obama to use that process called reconciliation, where you would only need 51 Senate votes for passage, as it wouldn't allow for a GOP filibuster. Obama has yet to use this process to pass anything, and since this bank tax is part of a budget bill, the situation is ripe for using reconciliation. I think there are at least 51 Democrats in the Senate that would vote yes on this, so they should certainly entertain the idea. Even though I hate the Democrats, I can't think of a better way for them to get voters back on their side in an election year by passing this bank tax.

 

[walter4]

taxing traders out of existence is the only way to financial stability.

 

[rc822]

Quote from walter4:

taxing traders out of existence is the only way to financial stability.

Taxing these liberal Democratic criminal organizations like ACORN, etc.... that receives zillions of dollars each year, would end up providing us with a surplus.

 

[listedguru]

Quote from rc822:

If this bank tax has difficulty passing the Senate, then it's time for Obama to use that process called reconciliation, where you would only need 51 Senate votes for passage, as it wouldn't allow for a GOP filibuster. Obama has yet to use this process to pass anything, and since this bank tax is part of a budget bill, the situation is ripe for using reconciliation. I think there are at least 51 Democrats in the Senate that would vote yes on this, so they should certainly entertain the idea. Even though I hate the Democrats, I can think of a better way for them to get voters back on their side in an election year by passing this bank tax.

I would think reconciliation (which only requires a simple majority) may be on the table for the upcoming budget bill. It's pretty clear that the admin is not inclined to impose a transaction tax (which is good news) but they may need to call on the reconciliation process to get a banking levy passed as part of the 2011 fiscal budget.

Interesting times indeed,

-Guru

 

[benwm]

Quote from TraDaToR:

Comments needed on The Hill. Say it's a far better idea than Tobin tax at least. There need to be someone paying. We can be in trouble if it doesn't pass.

I agree. Someone WILL pay - the public wants its pound of flesh, and the politicians in a sea of debt will give it to them to raise a little revenue too.

The Obama levy spread over ten years will not kill capitalism, a financial transaction tax would.

 

[rc822]

Quote from listedguru:

I would think reconciliation (which only requires a simple majority) may be on the table for the upcoming budget bill. It's pretty clear that the admin is not inclined to impose a transaction tax (which is good news) but they may need to call on the reconciliation process to get a banking levy passed as part of the 2011 fiscal budget.

Interesting times indeed,

-Guru

The Democrats run around saying how outraged the American people are at these banks. Well, now's the time to put up or shut up. If the public is soooooooooo angry, then it would be political suicide for Democrats not to pass this bank tax. If they choose not to, then it will be another nail in their coffins come Nov. 2nd. In addition, Obama wants to complete an unpopular health care bill, pass Cap & Trade, and Illegal Immigration legislation -(which would give amnesty to every one of them here illegally). So, if the Democrats fail on this bank tax proposal, which has great support from the American people, and then pass proposals which America is clearly against, like health care, Cap & Trade, and Illegal Immigration, it will be like the "Enola Gay" dropping another atomic bomb, this one landing squarely on the Democratic Party.

 

[JOSEF]

Quote from rc822:

If this bank tax has difficulty passing the Senate, then it's time for Obama to use that process called reconciliation, where you would only need 51 Senate votes for passage, as it wouldn't allow for a GOP filibuster. Obama has yet to use this process to pass anything, and since this bank tax is part of a budget bill, the situation is ripe for using reconciliation. I think there are at least 51 Democrats in the Senate that would vote yes on this, so they should certainly entertain the idea. Even though I hate the Democrats, I can't think of a better way for them to get voters back on their side in an election year by passing this bank tax.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you only need 51 votes to pass the budget. In other words, the filibuster cannot be used to block the budget. So, there wouldn't be any need for a reconciliation.

 

[Robert A. Green]

Quote from Robert A. Green:

....So the governments proposed bank fee of 1.5 percent assessed on big banks non-tier 1 asset positions (the riskier ones) is a new big-bank-only transaction tax.

Correction, sorry its 0.15 percent (15 basis points) not 1.5%.