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

[sheda]

But again, not relevant. the public image of the typical banker is so extremely bad nowadays, any hint of a tax measure to fight the banker is widely celebrated. it shows how all of this isn't about facts anymore, but about sentiment, and how the anti-ftt should try to change that. it's sad to see how, with the exception of malta, a majority in every eu countries population is pro-ftt.

Um the public image is not relevant and never has been with the European union, and at one time or another with every government on the planet, a million people can march against a war and are completely ignored.

Any hint of a tax measure to hurt the bankers is widely celebrated by the public but you can bet individual government's will not back it if it hurts them or there country, in the bigger picture..we are seeing this. So are the governments who do happen to back this economically illiterate damaging tax just willing to accept the damage caused because its what there public want? For the greater good of public perception?

Please...

 

[tortoise]

Quote from bjw:



nice one. if someone doesn't agree with your crazy theories about something completely non-ftt related, he must be pro-ftt as well. well, keep posting that thought, it tells readers a lot more about you than about me.

Nope. The possibility didn't cross my mind until your last post about the "acclaimed economists" supporting the FTT. Only then did I begin to wonder if there was a purpose behind your serial mischaracterizations of my statements--an attempt, perhaps, to delegitimize via the old straw man technique.

If I'm wrong about this, my sincere apologies. We'll see...

 

[tortoise]

Quote from sheda:

Um the public image is not relevant and never has been with the European union, and at one time or another with every government on the planet, a million people can march against a war and are completely ignored.

Any hint of a tax measure to hurt the bankers is widely celebrated by the public but you can bet individual government's will not back it if it hurts them or there country, in the bigger picture..we are seeing this. So are the governments who do happen to back this economically illiterate damaging tax just willing to accept the damage caused because its what there public want? For the greater good of public perception?

Please...

Right again

 

[bjw]

Quote from sheda:

Um the public image is not relevant and never has been with the European union, and at one time or another with every government on the planet, a million people can march against a war and are completely ignored.

i don't know in which country you live, but in my country populist political parties that are anti-Europe, anti-asylum seekers, anti-bankers, anti-cuts in spending, anti-everything, are gaining ground fast. in many countries these parties are near government power, or already in it. i'd say the public sentiment has become extremely important in today's economic and political conditions, and not quite comparable to an anti-war movement that unites all sort of different people from all sorts off different political movements but is unlikely to catapult any specific political party into parliament. but now i'm moving away from the ftt as well, just wanted to explain what i was saying.

edit: just look at sarkozy desparately needing an election soon, and truth be told he's pressing this more than merkel right now. it has been suggested in an url posted by someone in this thread not so long ago he's at least partly motivated by opportunistic reasons, because the voters he needs want it and he's very unpopular right now. personally i don't think this is that hard to believe, altough i must admit i have no clear image about how big the ftt-debate in france is at all.

Quote from sheda:
Any hint of a tax measure to hurt the bankers is widely celebrated by the public but you can bet individual government's will not back it if it hurts them or there country, in the bigger picture..we are seeing this.

even if this tax will be implemented in a small core of nations, the tax will have revenues. domestic investors, domestic pension funds will pay it. individual governments, especially (or shall i say specifically) those that are not heavily reliant on the financial sector, will likely gain from these revenues (at least, that's what they think, and itself the eu report doesn't contradict this), despite adverse effects. obviously the same doesn't apply to financially reliant countries like the uk, malta, cyprus, luxembourg, ireland, the netherlands, etc., who know this and therefore are, or should be, anti-ftt.

 

[tortoise]

Quote from bjw:

even if this tax will be implemented in a small core of nations, the tax will have revenues. domestic investors, domestic pension funds will pay it. individual governments, especially (or shall i say specifically) those that are not heavily reliant on the financial sector, will likely gain from these revenues (at least, that's what they think, and itself the eu report doesn't contradict this), despite adverse effects. obviously the same doesn't apply to financially reliant countries like the uk, malta, cyprus, luxembourg, ireland, the netherlands, etc., who know this and therefore are, or should be, anti-ftt.

tomdavis, et al, please let's be alert to the need to post careful rebuttals to inaccurate pro-ftt propaganda posted on this thread. i don't have any more time for this today but will try to post corrections later. thnx.

 

[Robert A. Green]

Everyone here -posting recently - seems to be against FTT, and loyal to our cause. Pro-FTT forces are diverse, and our anti-FTT forces are diverse too. Pro-FTT has a big tent to gather force, and we need a big tent too to defeat them.

I think we are stronger by being tolerant with each other over differences in views, strategy, how we see things, and emotions. It's normal to get upset at times and demonize the opponent. As I posted recently, my Forbes editor said I can't call Germans names, so I am guilty of going over board.

Personally, I think we should save our energy for fighting pro-FTT forces and not fight among ourselves. From time to time, a pro FTT person may join the discussion here and we can spot them fast, and respectfully beat them down with our superior position points.

 

[Robert A. Green]

Fee vs Tax. I'll check that BDO link later. UK can veto EU-wide tax, since that requires unanimous consent. We worried before about back-door VAT FTT. User fees are another angle too.

Precedent in US. Obama has his financial-crisis responsibility fee in his budget, which has not passed Congress. A fee, or levy on bank liabilities.

Banks argue it's a hidden tax, and unconstitutional since its too selective and punishing at a whim. Bill of attainder.

Obama Health Care mandates. Courts are deciding if it's a tax or not, as it can be challenged easier as a tax.

Obama added a small user fee on futures to his budget too, but it didn't pass.

UK clearly rejected FTT by not signing the fiscal compact. A user fee would be clearly a counter attack and courts might view it as a disguised FTT and illegal.

I'll look into user fees more vs taxes.

 

[justrading]

Quote from Robert A. Green:

Everyone here -posting recently - seems to be against FTT, and loyal to our cause. Pro-FTT forces are diverse, and our anti-FTT forces are diverse too. Pro-FTT has a big tent to gather force, and we need a big tent too to defeat them.

I think we are stronger by being tolerant with each other over differences in views, strategy, how we see things, and emotions. It's normal to get upset at times and demonize the opponent. As I posted recently, my Forbes editor said I can't call Germans names, so I am guilty of going over board.

Personally, I think we should save our energy for fighting pro-FTT forces and not fight among ourselves. From time to time, a pro FTT person may join the discussion here and we can spot them fast, and respectfully beat them down with our superior position points.

Well stated.

 

[TraDaToR]

Who is french or german here? I would like to talk about one thing via PM.

 

[sheda]

Quote from bjw:

i don't know in which country you live, but in my country populist political parties that are anti-Europe, anti-asylum seekers, anti-bankers, anti-cuts in spending, anti-everything, are gaining ground fast. in many countries these parties are near government power, or already in it. i'd say the public sentiment has become extremely important in today's economic and political conditions, and not quite comparable to an anti-war movement that unites all sort of different people from all sorts off different political movements but is unlikely to catapult any specific political party into parliament. but now i'm moving away from the ftt as well, just wanted to explain what i was saying.

I am from the only country to say no to the latest EU integration proposals outright, odd that considering this society has had a bad public feeling towards the EU for a long time, matters as vital as the Lisbon treaty were just signed without public consent or approval behind closed doors, even odder that the government should stand against the EU on this issue at a time when a lot of the population support it, what about America, being the home to the biggest occupy movement in the world?

Ah yea, sense overrides public reactionary image there to, hmm

Even if this tax will be implemented in a small core of nations, the tax will have revenues. domestic investors, domestic pension funds will pay it. individual governments, especially (or shall i say specifically) those that are not heavily reliant on the financial sector, will likely gain from these revenues (at least, that's what they think, and itself the eu report doesn't contradict this), despite adverse effects. obviously the same doesn't apply to financially reliant countries like the uk, malta, cyprus, luxembourg, ireland, the netherlands, etc., who know this and therefore are, or should be, anti-ftt.

Around 50% of marginal changes in GDP end up in tax revenues. GDP goes up or down by £10 billion, tax revenues will go up or down by about £5 billion. Rule of thumb but good enough.

So a fall in GDP by 0.5 to 1.76% of GDP will reduce tax revenues by 0.25 to 0.9% of GDP.

But the FTT will only bring in 0.1% of GDP (by the EU’s own same calculations). So we don’t actually get any extra revenue. We lose revenue in fact. This is a new tax which will *reduce* total tax revenues.

I do not know what's required to get it into your head but that's not my issue, funny thing is if we had a responsible team of people running the EU, who had not caused the disaster currently unfolding, acted with respect and respected democracy, I would not be against a Well designed FTT, one that does not destroy GDP and cost 1 million jobs, only for the "revenue" to be wasted anyway...