................................................ Congratulations !!!! You are catching on..... Now tell me..... Can the marketplace exist without someone making the markets ? This is a yes/no question.... And the MMs are who ? The very Bankers whom the govt. is going after.... If MM's have to pay .05%.....and trades the stock thousands of times per year....how many times the price of the stock ? Do the math .... So the govt. ends up exempting the very banks that they thought they were going to hit with the tax....They will not pay a dime... Retail only will pay the tax.... Care to guess the impact on securities prices if there is no one present to make the market ? Now tell me.... How many politicians does it take to put in a light bulb ? I say let's take the whole show to those countries where the trading consortium controls the whole game....not bogus populist politicians.... Then efficiency of capital could be "for real"....
Thanks for posting this. It's interesting they say the UK's real hope may be to draw attention to more workable ideas like a rescue fund supported by a levy on financial institutions. Thats makes the most sense - tax the damn instituitions. This IMHO is the most likely outcome. -Guru
And this is one of the most undercovered topics... The media needs to tell the public there are other ways of taxing BANKS.
........................................................................................ The public needs to understand one thing.... The Banks would be exempt from the TT tax because the MM function has to remain exempt....or else there would be no market place for stocks....Since the banks would be exempt....and since the tax is meant for banks....thus what would be the reason for a TT tax.....When the retail taxpayers would be the ones paying 100% of the tax.... It is really just this simple..... The problem now is....the Polys blabbing away still want the public to think that they are really smart..... Poly Ego is now the problem.....
dumbass response from Rep Sires (D-NJ, Hudson) to petition letter sent to Congress: December 10, 2009 Dear Mr. xxxxxx, Thank you for contacting me regarding a tax on the buying and selling of stocks. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue. As you may know, Congressman DeFazio (D-OR) introduced H.R. 1068 Let Wall Street Pay for Wall Street's Bailout Act of 2009 on February 13, 2009. The bill would require securities trading facilities to pay an excise tax on a specified percentage of the value of securities and commodities transactions sufficient to recoup the net cost of carrying out the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. By levying a small fee when stocks, futures, swaps, options and other securities are bought and sold, the tax could potentially take in between $120 billion and $240 billion annually. To ensure that the law targets speculators and not pension funds or retirement investors, the tax would be refunded for tax-favored retirement accounts such as 401(k) plans and education and health savings accounts. Additionally, the tax would not apply to the first $100,000 of a trader's annual transactions. The bill has been referred to the Committee on Ways and Means. Please know that I will keep your views on taxing stock trades in mind should the bill come to a vote in the House of Representatives. Again, thank you for contacting me, and please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns. Sounds like our "esteemed" colleague from Hudson Cty (home of Wall Street West) is in support of this tax, not against. You'd figure that someone who represents a district whose constituents are so heavily tied to the financial sector's fortunes would be more supportive of our view and less of DickFazio's. Probably one of his sycophants doing the email-response thing, but still, represents the Congressman's views.
Sounds like he's mixing together both HR 1068 and HR 4191. I don't think they mention using the proceeds to pay back TARP in HR 4191. But I agree with you he's most likely for the tax. Pretty disturbing actually being where's he's from -Guru
german chancellor angela merkel criticized dirk niebel (fdp, foreign aid secretary) for rejecting a financial transaction tax and said it is to early for any final statements. merkel said it has been agreed internationally to wait for the iwf report and then the g20 will have to discuss the subject next autumn. http://www.net-tribune.de/nt/node/1...Merkel-kritisiert-ihren-Entwicklungsministers
Now it's $240 Billion. Really! I like how the media, even from the opponents, do not question DeFazio's purposefully tantalizing $150 Billion revenue number. Up until the last 3 years, the entire securities industry pre-tax profits totaled an average $22B per year from 1998 through 2006. Isn't $150B nearly the same amount as the total personal US savings rate? And how much of that is invested in securities? 106 M households $51K household income Maybe 3% savings rate the last decade, (more like 6% lately as people hold on for life) They are going to kill an entire industry for money that does not even exist.
While it would have to go through legislative channels in those respective countries, bear in mind that they (as far as I know) do not have a filibuster. In other words, it is much easier to pass something to law in both the UK and Germany than here in the US.