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

Here are some quotes from Strauss-Kahm following the G20 meetings:

http://www.eurasiareview.com/opinio...n-following-the-group-of-20-meeting-21022011/

So financial sector — not enough. On top — I forgot — maybe you remember that last June at the G-20 in Toronto, the IMF proposed what we called “FAT,” Financial Activity Tax, which is our version of the Tobin Tax. In our view, most effective than on transactions, on all activities. I’m not going to elaborate on details. But we proposed — in fact, we proposed two taxes because, for technical reasons, we wanted to address two problems.

I’m sorry to say that I don’t see those taxes implemented, and I’m very unhappy. Many have been surprised to see the IMF proposing to tax the financial sector, but it was just fair — not only to get money to repair the sector, or to do other things, but also because we want to curb the behavior.

We cannot have a financial sector where people take risks, took big risks, that when they succeed, the money is for them, but when they fail, the losses have to be paid by everybody.

so if you have a tax which will be an incentive to take less risk was exactly the purpose of what we proposed. Again, I don’t see this implemented.


QUESTION: Same question applies to your phrase “you don’t see a financial tax. I don’t see a financial tax being implemented.” Is this a present verb or a future verb?

MR. STRAUSS-KAHN: No, no. I don’t see it so far. Our report is still six months, more than six, eight months old.

QUESTION: Do you have any hope?

MR. STRAUSS-KAHN: No, I have hope.

QUESTION: The argument…

MR. STRAUSS-KAHN: I always have hope.

QUESTION: …that’s brought from countries is: if there is not an accord, even among tax havens, etcetera, that the tax won’t work. Do you have an answer to that?

MR. STRAUSS-KAHN: Yes. And that’s why the two taxes proposed by the IMF are much more effective in my view than the traditional financial transaction tax, which requires more or less that all the players will be on board. It’s not the case for our tax, and that’s one of the reasons, I think, it’s superior to the financial transaction tax.

-Guru
 
SIFMA Reiterates Opposition to Latest Call for a Securities Transaction Tax

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., in an interview on PBS NewsHour on Wednesday mentioned the need for a "transaction fee on Wall Street." Sanders, who caucuses with the Democrats...

http://www.tradersmagazine.com/news...e-sanders-hft-volume-securities-107185-1.html
--------------------------------
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: You want to know the way to raise money? Put a transaction fee on Wall Street, so maybe we can curb some of the speculation and raise some money.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, we hear you. And we're going to leave it there.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june11/berniesanders_02-16.html
-------------------------------------

NPR receives a half billion dollars+ from taxpayers.
 
Quote from FightTheFuture:

SIFMA Reiterates Opposition to Latest Call for a Securities Transaction Tax

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., in an interview on PBS NewsHour on Wednesday mentioned the need for a "transaction fee on Wall Street." Sanders, who caucuses with the Democrats...

http://www.tradersmagazine.com/news...e-sanders-hft-volume-securities-107185-1.html
--------------------------------
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: You want to know the way to raise money? Put a transaction fee on Wall Street, so maybe we can curb some of the speculation and raise some money.

JUDY WOODRUFF: Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, we hear you. And we're going to leave it there.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june11/berniesanders_02-16.html
-------------------------------------

NPR receives a half billion dollars+ from taxpayers.
More...

From reading the traders magazine piece it sounds like Sander's is going to bring a FTT proposal at some point. Don't these idiots know that there is no support for an FTT (in any form) in the house or Senate. These libs like Sanders and Defazio can bring all the FTT proposals they want and they won't go anywhere. Don't they know that the US just puked all over France and Germany's FTT proposal at the G20 meetings?

http://www.taxationinfonews.com/2011/02/france-brings-back-financial-transaction-tax-argument/

Following the Meeting, the French Finance Minister suggested that Germany also approves of a FTT system, and is currently investigating its feasibility. She noted that throughout the meeting, representatives of the US were staunchly against the FTT. The Minister added, “…it would be ideal for everyone to agree to it but the problem today is that a certain number of countries do not agree.”

-Guru
 
Here's an interesting article on Obama's proposed $30B bank tax he proposed in the latest fy 2012 budget (down from the $90B he called for last year). These totals are over 10 years. Just an FYI this is a different tax than the FTT.

Barack Obama's unlikely to cash in on bank tax:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/50002.html

"Still, bankers view the tax proposal as punitive and not in keeping with the administration’s efforts to restore good relations with Wall Street and, more broadly, all of corporate America."

"They also said the administration knew the proposal would be rejected but needed all the revenue sources it could find to make its overall deficit projections appear less dire."

"Several executives said they believed the bank tax was included only because to abandon it would be to admit it was a bad idea in the first place."

“It’s kind of hard to take an item out of the budget as big as the bank tax, once you put it in,” said one executive of a large bank. “To take it out is to admit there was something wrong with it the first time."

“Even with Democrats in control last time, though, [the administration] couldn’t sell this,” Schock said. “You cannot come out and tax institutions that didn’t take bailout funds and then not tax those that did, [including] Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and AIG. It’s dead on arrival.”

-Guru
 
Trumka banged the transaction tax drum on cnbc today to help states pay for the union workers.

As these state fights escalate across the country, expect him to turn up the volume on it again.
 
Quote from seasideheights:

Trumka banged the transaction tax drum on cnbc today to help states pay for the union workers.

As these state fights escalate across the country, expect him to turn up the volume on it again.
More...

Didn't see it...is he the scumbag afl-cio president?
 
I was cooking my famous chili (which takes a while!), and decided to turn on the ignorant CNBC around 4:05 Eastern. Mr. Socilism union president was on pushing for a stock transaction tax, and Bartiromo let him pitch that shit with no rebuttal! Blows me away!!!!!! Grrrrrr!!!!!!!!
 
FTT really means Financial Trumpka Tax. Per a WSJ op-ed this week, almost every tax hike proposal over the past few years was pushed by greedy unions. From property tax, to income tax, to estate tax and sales tax, unions have been leading the tax hike charge. Why? To pay for public-sector union's raping the public trust, with much higher pay, defined benefit pensions, health benefits, collective bargaining rights, and special breaks versus taxpayers.

Two wrongs don't make a right. It's destroying states, cities and the federal government to overpay unions by ridiculous amounts. Raising taxes to unfair levels on investors, property owners and those left with an income makes it a double wrong and not right.

Same union politics in the EU too.
 
Quote from Robert A. Green:

FTT really means Financial Trumpka Tax. Per a WSJ op-ed this week, almost every tax hike proposal over the past few years was pushed by greedy unions. From property tax, to income tax, to estate tax and sales tax, unions have been leading the tax hike charge. Why? To pay for public-sector union's raping the public trust, with much higher pay, defined benefit pensions, health benefits, collective bargaining rights, and special breaks versus taxpayers.

Two wrongs don't make a right. It's destroying states, cities and the federal government to overpay unions by ridiculous amounts. Raising taxes to unfair levels on investors, property owners and those left with an income makes it a double wrong and not right.

Same union politics in the EU too.
More...

LOL. Here's Trumka calling for a higher gas tax to fund infrastructure investment.

AFL-CIO Chief: Raising Taxes Will Create More Jobs:

http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticke...55.html?tickers=xlf,skf,^dji,^gspc,ge,iyj,xom

"We need to create jobs. The best way to do that is through infrastructure development." Simply maintaining the existing infrastructure in this country will cost $2.2 trillion over five years, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers. That doesn't include Obama's objective of high-speed rails and green energy projects.

"Trumka didn't say specifically how much he would raise the gas tax, but mentioned he's shown the President a $256 billion plan to improve infrastructure. If every billion spent on infrastructure creates 35,000 jobs, as he claims, this package would create close to 9 million jobs over the next five years."

"The White House isn't on-board with the plan. Addressing the issue on "Face the Nation" in January, White House Chief of Staff Richard Daley said he isn't in favor of raising taxes right now.

"Trumka does have an unlikely supporter for higher gas taxes in the right-leaning Chamber of Commerce. However, the Chamber of Commerce does not support Trumka's other tax initiative: creating a financial transaction tax."

So I guess Trumka is just throwing out all kinds of taxes in hopes that one will stick. What a douche...

-Guru
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top