Mark Cuban pushes for 20 cents per share tax on every roundtrip.

This is typical ET....you have pikers blaming tighter bid ask spreads for their inability to trade the current markets....wishing for days of old....probably got long a few in the bull run.....thinking they know how to trade.....

Anyone who begs to pay higher spreads and commissions because narrower spreads and lower costs negate their trading ability.....

Well...I will leave that one to those who really know how to trade......

Thank God guys like this are still helping feed profits to those that can....

What an idiot......
Fucking hilarious.....
 
Quote from Avid_Consumer:



does high freq trading add valuable real liquidity? doesn't seem clear cut to me at all.

[/B]
More...
It s totally irrelevant if high freq trading adds "valuable real liquidity". Its about punishing the wrong group with this stupid idea of taxing wall street.
 
Quote from Avid_Consumer:



does high freq trading add valuable real liquidity? doesn't seem clear cut to me at all.

Dude, are you retarded? How can you possibly ask that question?

People trade in different timeframes. Have you never looked at an instrument that just formed for example a HS formation on lets say a daily timeframe, shorting or selling your position like a mad man, and asking yourself: "Who on earth wants to buy this thing?" Timeframes my friend. Somebody with a longer or shorter timeframe is seeing something compleatly different. Whithout us traders creating liquidity, yes liquidity I tell you, nobady would buy that instrument and it would collapse. We tighten the spreads, and we create liquidity.
 
Quote from veggen:

Quote from Avid_Consumer:



does high freq trading add valuable real liquidity? doesn't seem clear cut to me at all.

Dude, are you retarded? How can you possibly ask that question?

People trade in different timeframes. Have you never looked at an instrument that just formed for example a HS formation on lets say a daily timeframe, shorting or selling your position like a mad man, and asking yourself: "Who on earth wants to buy this thing?" Timeframes my friend. Somebody with a longer or shorter timeframe is seeing something compleatly different. Whithout us traders creating liquidity, yes liquidity I tell you, nobady would buy that instrument and it would collapse. We tighten the spreads, and we create liquidity.
More...

couldnt agree more, value value value that is what liquidity creates. but if the previous poster wants this tax thinking the market would be more efficient lets suppose this

i want to buy xyz a 35 dollar stock in todays market kinda of illiquid avg vol 300,000 a day. if the bid is 34.95 ask 35.00 seems like a good deal close to the last print etc

same stock with no liquidity bid 31 ask 37 last trade 35 so i buy my 100 shares if i want to sell i can only get 31, not only do you pay up for it you get taxed on top of that plus commissions and god forbid we have another crisis where in the hell do you think your getting out.

not a pretty picture if you want efficient markets i would like to get out somewhere in the vacinity of not getting raped. you cannot put a price tag on liquidity and what value it represents

this tax seems to represent the duke and duke policy of no matter who wins duke and duke gets the commissions, anyone who disagrees should be beaten over the head with a sledge hammer for being so god damn stupid. i love and appreciate my money so why the hell would i want to give any more of my money to a greedy govt that doesnt even give me a say so and where this money would be spent. if i was a politician who spewed this crap and someone bought it i would behind closed doors tell my wife how stupid some of these americans are now a days
 
maybe i am retarded. help me out... i'm certainly open to that possibility.

should a transaction imply the intention to own an asset?

is it sustainable to conduct a financial economy increasingly based on the intention to profit off the rules of the system rather than the value of the actual assets?

should the participants who hold no stake in the sustainability of the economy have to purchase that right in order to participate?
 
Quote from The Dutchman:

It s totally irrelevant if high freq trading adds "valuable real liquidity". Its about punishing the wrong group with this stupid idea of taxing wall street.
More...
It's amazing that we actually have to have these conversations and explain this to people, who if they like illiquid markets should stick to real estate (and you see what is happening with that one).

I honestly never realized that people were so stupid.
 
Quote from Avid_Consumer:

maybe i am retarded. help me out... i'm certainly open to that possibility.

should a transaction imply the intention to own an asset?

is it sustainable to conduct a financial economy increasingly based on the intention to profit off the rules of the system rather than the value of the actual assets?

should the participants who hold no stake in the sustainability of the economy have to purchase that right in order to participate?
More...
Nothing you are saying here actually means anything.

It's just another way for politicians to take money from people and line their pockets with it.
 
i don't mind the criticism, but really .. you need to step outside your assumptions.

you're thinking as a free agent with no stake in the survival of the whole.
 
If there's any type of transaction tax every prop trader with 5-50k is basically out of business over night for 2 reasons. #1 every prop firm will be gone as they make there money off commission overides and #2 the low capitalized prop traders can't really hold overnight.The only way to make a living would be to have 300k or more and hold positions for days and that would even be tough. As far as reducing volatility it does nothing as look at stamp tax nations like the uk,india and chinia. All down as much or more than us
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top