Quote from listedguru:
There certainly is a lot of spin in this piece. Really nothing new from it regarding actual news though. I do find it interesting that Harkin talks about the ftt being part of a package. I guess he thinks they can get it through as part of an overhaul of the irs tax code? Any way I still believe the Harkin/Defazio bill is DOA and won't even make it out of committee. We also know that this doesn't have the support in the Senate either.
I guess if Obama does get behind the tax at some point hopefully we can educate everyone about how this is actually a tax on investment and their pensions (you too unions) and not a tax on the banks. I think the administration knows this and that it won't play well to the people and thats way they are pushing the crisis responsibility fee - which they can call a direct tax on the evil banks. I think they know that pushing a direct tax on the middle class and not the 1% (evil bankers) is bad politics.
-Guru
There's that. But a lot of folks are disenchanted with the stock market these days. They see their paltry mutual fund returns, then read about investment banking bonuses and say, "screw 'em"--even if, in fact, they're the ones who would be screwed by this tax.
The appeal of F.T.T. is not logical. It's emotional. It's irrational. The pro-F.T.T. forces are playing off that, and playing to win.
But there's one emotional area where the F.T.T. people are on shaky ground.
JOBS.
In that article I linked to earlier, Baker himself conceded that "many" people would be unemployed as a result of the tax. He went on to say that this would be a good thing, just like it would be a good thing if we were to fire two-thirds of this country's truckers yet still be able to transport the same amount of goods. After all, he said, economic efficiency is good thing, and what rational person isn't in favor of economic efficiency?
I was glad to see Baker thinking like an economist and not merely like a political hack. Alas (for him), his economist's argument will not gladden the hearts of a lot of folks--rank-and-file union types, for instance. And it's not something any administration will want to champion in the teeth of a recession.
But now that Mr. Baker's on record with what he really thinks, let's make the most of it. Let's make the argument about jobs. Let's quantify the economic impact of this petty, nonsensical, punitive tax.
Let's hammer home the way an F.T.T. will hit Main Street--and I don't mean how it will hit Main Street's already sorry 401ks. I mean let's make sure everyone sees how an F.T.T. would put the stock brokers of Main Street and the accountants of Main Street and insurance agents and financial planners of Main Street out on the street. Let's make sure the police union and the fireman's union sees how it would deprive the beat cop and the fireman who trades fx at night a way to help put their kids through college, or a spouse through grad school.
Let's lay bare the hypocrisy of the pro-F.T.T. forces for all of Main Street to see. If our society wants to do something about HFT, or Jon Corzine, or Fat Cats (real or imagined), it can be done without depriving honest, hardworking people of Main Street the opportunity to better their lives, to better the lives of their families, to contribute to their communities.
Let's make clear that an F.T.T. would decimate the livelihoods of tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of individuals on Main Street. Let's not allow our elected representatives to forget that these citizens would no longer be able to contribute to their communities as they would be looking instead to government aid while they sought to remake their lives and careers in the teeth of the most ferocious recession in memory.
Let's do that, and this sucker is dead.