................................................ The BIG BANKS.... WIN AGAIN.... GRATUS PELOSI/DEFAZIO/HARKIN EITHER 1) LYING SCUM OR 2) DUMB AS HELL ....................... Let"s move the whole show to Switzerland/Singapore/Hong Kong ALL OF IT...... Maybe there will be a few OTCC PINK SHEETS left for the US..... With the DEMS all will go to the PINKS anyway.....
Sunday Talk Shows: Did the tax get brought up on any of the Sunday talk shows today? I know Cramer was supposed to be on talking about job creation. Did anyone happen to catch him? Did he bring up the tax? -Guru
I only saw an excerpt from summers but he didnt talk about it from what I saw. I will look tonight and see what I can find
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BC0MH20091213 Semi positive response from Paul Volker on the transaction tax, he said he opposes. Its a lot different then a few months ago when he said the transaction tax was an interesting idea and it should be studied in congress, so we can take that as a positive, plus he is on Obamas economic advisory team. He does like the bank bonus tax or atleast finds it interesting. Told by the Welt am Sonntag weekly that German Chancellor Angela Merkel had described the British plan as "charming," Volcker said he found little charming about financial markets at the moment. "But the British idea is interesting. People are angry that workers in the financial sector make so much money. And this massive compensation promoted behavior that destabilised the financial markets," he said in the German translation of his remarks printed on Sunday. London's surprise tax on big banker bonuses has unleashed a clamorous global debate on the step. Volcker said he "instinctively opposed" any tax on financial transactions, a step that proponents say could limit the risk of another economic crisis. "But it may be worthwhile to look into the current proposals as long as the result is not predetermined. That would at least end all this renewed talk about the idea, but overall I am skeptical about these ideas."
Cramer mentioned that taxes will have to go up but then Dick Gregory (the host) moved to the next guest to ask a question. Cramer still needs to be watched & if he brings the transaction tax up again, we'll mobilize again. We definitely had an impact the last go around. We will again if necessary.
If anyone here is from Germany, or knows the German language, getting Volcker's full comments rather than just the Reuters summary, would be helpful.
I cannot find anything more indepth on Volcker. but if you go back to septemeber with some articles, he still has some reservations on it but says its a good idea for congress to put a study in and see, but warns that to little of a rate wont do anything in raising money, to much of a rate will disrupt markets. He seems to play both sides of the fence on this a little playing it safe. I will see if I can find more from the rueters article, if I can find the txt somewhere if its in German, google cna translate it. I will let you know
Interesting speculation overseas. A March election would precede the big April release of the transaction tax report. Brown being replaced with someone against the tax would make the April release pretty meaningless. Potential good news there. -------------------------------------------------------------- Speculation mounts that Gordon Brown may call an early election http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6955246.ece
Good find, I hope they call for it early and then we can really put to bed a global tax, becuase Cameron would be against it ! Thanks Seaside
ah ha! my first semi-intelligent response from a politician that received my petition: (Quigley is a fiscally conservative democrat in the house from Illinois) Dear XX. XXXXX: Thank you for contacting me with your concerns regarding H.R. 4191, the Let Wall Street Pay for Wall Street's Bailout Act of 2009. Your views are important to me, and I appreciate hearing from you. H.R. 4191 seeks to place a .25% tax on each covered securities transaction involving financial instruments such as futures, stocks and options. The basic purpose of this excise tax would be to recoup funds spent through the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). I agree that there were not sufficient oversight provisions included in the original TARP program, and I support all efforts to increase oversight of taxpayer funds spent to bolster private enterprise in the current recession. As you know, opponents of H.R. 4191 point to the fact that imposing a tax on all covered securities transactions would hurt average investors by increasing trading costs, rather than impact the banks and brokerages at which it is targeted. Additionally, there is fear that this legislation may lead to greatly diminished liquidity and high volatility in the marketplace, negative side effects that could further imperil economic recovery. H.R. 4191 has been referred to the Committee on Ways and Means and now awaits further action. Should this bill be considered on the House floor, please be assured that I will cast my vote with your concerns in mind. Thank you again for sharing your thoughts on this important matter. Please feel free to visit my website, www.house.gov/quigley, for periodic updates on my work and to sign up for my e-newsletter, and do not hesitate to contact me again about issues of concern to you. It is an honor to serve you in the U.S. Congress. Sincerely, Mike Quigley Member of Congress He does confuse H.R. 4191 with H.R. 1068, but I'll give him a break since he seems to understand the consequences more than the other responses I received.