Obama Declares War on Investors

[CaptainObvious]

Quote from Landis82:

Why do you think he's called Captain Obvious???

Hey, I think that statement is taken out of context. Then again...

 

[omegapoint]

Quote from grizzlybear:

Run on the banks planned for 04/17/2009

On April 17th - beginning at midnight EST - supporters of the Campaign for Liberty and of the campaign to END THE FED will join together to trigger a first in a series of “bank runs” in hopes of overwhelming the Federal Reserve’s ability to continue it’s propping up of our nation’s bankrupt financial system.

The goal of this project is to highlight the need to pass Congressman Ron Paul’s recently reintroduced House Resolution 833 - a bill to abolish the Federal Reserve.

We wish to emphasize the need for sound money - backed by gold and or silver.

All supporters should remove all cash except $17.76 from any bank and withdraw maximum allowable funds from any money market accounts on that day.

We seek an “electronic run on the banks” in addition to traditional “bank runs.” Over time, we hope to build these events in order to topple the effectiveness of the Federal reserve

http://libertyormayhem.com/

OMG, the mutants have organized and are going to make a run on the banks ...that should help.

 

[smilingsynic]

Quote from jamis359:

Obama's proposed top rate is 39.6%, bringing back up exactly where it was under Clinton. Hmm, I seem to recall that the wealthy got wealthier and businesses grew just fine during the Clinton years. This proves Kudlow wrong, and exposes his tirade to be nothing but propaganda and FUD to try to undermine Obama.

The top rate was even higher during the boom decades after WW2. Not that I would welcome high rates again...

I remember well the articles from Steve Forbes and others that predicted gloom and doom after the Clinton tax hike. Many bet heavily against the stock market, shorting financials and tech, in 1994 and 1995. Of course, they were wrong.

 

[smilingsynic]

Quote from ProfitMania:

I can tell who are elite traders and who is just investors from their post in this thread.
If you are an elite trader, then you should want lower income tax and hence higher capital gain tax if necessary.
If you are an investor, then you want a lower capital gain tax rate.

On the contrary, elite traders do not worry that much about taxes, because they are confident they can always make more by increasing position size.

Moreover, they are so grateful to be in such a wonderful business that they have healthy charitable contributions to help offset any taxes.

 

[insider trading]

Quote from jficquette:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/29434104


Article by Kudlow who happens to make sense for once.


Friday, 27 Feb 2009 | 4:39 PM ET Text Size Posted By: Larry Kudlow
Anchor

-------------------------------------------------------------

Let me be very clear on the economics of President Obama’s State of the Union speech and his budget.

He is declaring war on investors, entrepreneurs, small businesses, large corporations, and private-equity and venture-capital funds.

That is the meaning of his anti-growth tax-hike proposals, which make absolutely no sense at all — either for this recession or from the standpoint of expanding our economy’s long-run potential to grow.

Raising the marginal tax rate on successful earners, capital, dividends, and all the private funds is a function of Obama’s left-wing social vision, and a repudiation of his economic-recovery statements. Ditto for his sweeping government-planning-and-spending program, which will wind up raising federal outlays as a share of GDP to at least 30 percent, if not more, over the next 10 years.

This is nearly double the government-spending low-point reached during the late 1990s by the Gingrich Congress and the Clinton administration. While not quite as high as spending levels in Western Europe, we regrettably will be gaining on this statist-planning approach.

Study after study over the past several decades has shown how countries that spend more produce less, while nations that tax less produce more. Obama is doing it wrong on both counts.

And as far as middle-class tax cuts are concerned, Obama’s cap-and-trade program will be a huge across-the-board tax increase on blue-collar workers, including unionized workers. Industrial production is plunging, but new carbon taxes will prevent production from ever recovering. While the country wants more fuel and power, cap-and-trade will deliver less.

The tax hikes will generate lower growth and fewer revenues. Yes, the economy will recover. But Obama’s rosy scenario of 4 percent recovery growth in the out years of his budget is not likely to occur. The combination of easy money from the Fed and below-potential economic growth is a prescription for stagflation. That’s one of the messages of the falling stock market.

Essentially, the Obama economic policies represent a major Democratic party relapse into Great Society social spending and taxing. It is a return to the LBJ/Nixon era, and a move away from the Reagan/Clinton period. House Republicans, fortunately, are 90 days sober, as they are putting up a valiant fight to stop the big-government onslaught and move the GOP back to first principles.

Noteworthy up here on Wall Street, a great many Obama supporters — especially hedge-fund types who voted for “change” — are becoming disillusioned with the performances of Obama and Treasury man Geithner.

There is a growing sense of buyer’s remorse.

Well then, do conservatives dare say: We told you so?

We just had a president that lowered taxes for wall street and let them run wild,and look at the outcome

 

[bigarrow]

Quote from jficquette:

I didn't hear what he said so I have no comment. I doubt if you remember exactly what he said. You probably just heard what you wanted too.

Are you a dittohead? Do you not have an opinion on the over fishing of the ocean? Try to gather some courage and post your opinion of the over fishing issue. I'm assuming you are right 100% of the time since you can know that Rush is right only 99% of the time. You don't need to answer, I know some dittoheads and if you are like them you'll have listen to Rush's view before you can know what your view is supposed to be.

 

[Covert]

Quote from Landis82:

And yet this piece of legislation back in 2000 by one of Bush's buddies from Texas, Phil Gramm trumps anything that came out of Fannie and Freddie . . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000

Cleverly pushed into the "FY2001 Appropriations Act" without even a committee hearing OR a recorded vote.

But leave it to the Joe Six-Packs of the world to think that our current banking crisis is the result of Fannie and Freddie.

Get real.

Hey, Dumbass- while you were cutting and pasting that link, did you bother to read it? Didn't think so. Answer me this: Who signed the bill? Go on, give it some thought- I'm guessing that you know that after congress passes a bill, it doesn't become the law of the land until the President signs it...now...Who was President in 2000? Is it even possible that you didn't know this? Are you so completely ignorant that you don't know that the Governor of Texas cannot POSSIBLY be responsible for federal legislation? Please, if you don't like the bill, or think that it's responsible for today's problems, then by all means, call out the people who wrote it, passed it and signed it. But don't betray your utter lack of sense by blaming THAT bill on a someone who had NOTHING to do with it. Please, smarten up.

 

[omegapoint]

Quote from Covert:

Hey, Dumbass- while you were cutting and pasting that link, did you bother to read it? Didn't think so. Answer me this: Who signed the bill? Go on, give it some thought- I'm guessing that you know that after congress passes a bill, it doesn't become the law of the land until the President signs it...now...Who was President in 2000? Is it even possible that you didn't know this? Are you so completely ignorant that you don't know that the Governor of Texas cannot POSSIBLY be responsible for federal legislation? Please, if you don't like the bill, or think that it's responsible for today's problems, then by all means, call out the people who wrote it, passed it and signed it. But don't betray your utter lack of sense by blaming THAT bill on a someone who had NOTHING to do with it. Please, smarten up.

Ok so Clinton sold out his party, now what. Whats more significant than who is what, that what is the republican belief that we don't need no stinkin regulation, let business alone to do what it wants. Well, they got what they wanted however and this is what the chest thumpin got us. You don't leave children alone w/o a babysitter.