So this article is pushing Keith Ellison's HR 6411. I guess the author doesn't realize that bill died in the 112th congress. This isn't even an active bill currently: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr6411 "This bill was introduced on September 14, 2012, in a previous session of Congress, but was not enacted."
Every trader and capitalist needs to realize that this is what you get when you elect power hungry leftists and Democrats. These people will do anything to keep themselves in power which means they are always looking for more revenue to redistribute. That is how they get elected. Scourge of the earth IMO
This has be the plan since FDR. And now, you better believe the leftist liberal demorats have done the job. These are scum of the earth people who use class warfare, racism, union circle-jerks and redistribution (buyouts or payoff as you will for votes)!! Then, they enrich themselves over and over while destroying everything in sight. The demorats NEVER want their voting block to be successful...they have to buy them off, play class warfare and racism in order to scare up the votes. F*cking sickening and this has been played many times in history of civilizations with dire consequences. Saying that, the FTT will be pushed HARD this year. Watch your asses and spread the facts!!
Agreed and its time that people started calling these people out for what they are. They have no problem playing hardball in order to advance their agenda but conservatives play it safe and nice. This isn't about paying for the financial bailout as they say. This isn't about shutting down high frequency trading. This is nothing more than a way to steal more money so they can keep the handouts going, and in the process get re-elected.
There are so many things wrong in this article that it's laughable to read. There is a clear assumption of a glorified benefit without actually taking into account reality. Here are some of my favorite arguments the author makes: 1) The FTT must be a unified movement accross all nations in order to "prevent the flight of capital" 2) Only people who make more than $50k a year would be affected. -Is $50k+ what is now considered rich and the "tax target" these days? I don't think many people who make less than $50k a year have too much disposable income to trade stocks or save for retirement. 3) The proposed tax is viewed as "tiny" and only 50 cents on every $100, ie. $50 on a $10,000 trade. -It may just be me, but I don't see .5% as a tiny amount on a stock transaction. It you make 2 roundtrip day trades of 200 shares on a $50 stock you are paying out $200 a day in taxes or am I wrong? And this is a good thing? 4) Individual investors won't be taxed, just the institutions and there is "hope" the institutions won't pass on the costs back to the investor. It sounds like there is no actual plan for anything, just tax "rich" people who can afford to make a stock trade and our financial problems will magically go away. The mear fact that in the article the author has no plan for what to actually do with the new tax revenue just shows how sad the position behind the FTT is. He starts off by saying that Wall Street owes us for the financial condition that we are in but then goes on to say that the money could be funneled to help research global warming and AIDS relief. I thought the tax was supposed to make up for the current financial shortfall, or is it to fund feel good projects? If you are crying for a redstribution of wealth, at least actually give the money to the people in need after you take it instead of just spending it on other things. I could be wrong with many of the actual details, but I was just commenting from this articles perspective.
Only idiotic leftists believe that companies just have extra money laying around to "not pass this onto their customers". As if mutual funds aren't currently squeezing their margins to compete with an abundance of competition from lost cost funds and ETF's. You can see the lack of business experience in just about every leftist article or position statement. It's no wonder why 90% of the time they are lawyers, community organizers or media members, with ZERO real world business experience. Anyone claiming that half of a percentage point is a "small" tax, when most asset allocated investors are lucky to make a 2-3% real return pa show's they are challenged at math.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/10/u...e-jacob-j-lew-as-treasury-secretary.html?_r=0 So, Jacob J. Lew will be Treasury Secretary. What do you think about that? Is it good or bad?
From what I can find he's definately a liberal (LOL). He was a senior policy advisor to Tip O'Neill in the 1980's. But it sounds like he did work for Citigroup from 2006 - 2009. Something I read mentioned he served as COO of Citigroup Alternative Investments investing in a hedge fund that bet on the housing market to collapse. I read this somewhere so not sure if it's 100% true. He also supposedly told a Senate panel in 2010 that he did not believe that deregulation led to the financial crisis. What does it all mean? Who the heck knows. One would think that because he's been around Wall Street that would make him wise enough to know that the FTT is bad idea but I'm not convinced of that until he tells us (LOL)... I guess he's better than Paul Krugman -Guru
So is this when the actual QMV vote is going to take place? That is the vote to watch. Everything else is just smoke and mirrors. -Guru