So "now is the time" for the Slippery Slope fallacy? (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope ) Or maybe there is some logical connection and expected future progression between Wales and finance (?) But the usual Madonna-Keynes badly chosen targetting applies... because... wasn't Barclays the only UK bank which did not receive any public money (they went to sovereign funds for a "private bailout" as you may recall)? And weren't the only bank executives who refused to collect their bonuses from Barclays? And aren't Barclays "bonuses" no longer a free short-term option? Weren't they in fact turned into long-term performance-based awards that would vest over 3 years and be subject to a clawback (i.e. no longer free)? (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/eac6bf60-1b2d-11df-953f-00144feab49a.html ) I suspect Tobin campaigners and their spin doctors have thoroughly exhausted the Appeal to Autority (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority ), after Baker turned out to be a non-published pseudoscientist wrong on maths, and after Stiglitz's prolific output did not contain anything remotely relevant to a Tobin tax (while he did publish on every other tax conceivable, including random ones), and after the "10 per country? I know more personally!" list of normative economists was needed to obscure the lack of published empirical research supporting FTT taxes... Celebrity campaigns - this is not how evidence-based policy works. BTW, TPCS, maybe the two of us could follow the example of climatologists and set up a website like this one: http://www.skepticalscience.com/ ?
another article about The Perils of a Financial Transaction Tax: http://www.wallstreetandtech.com/re...cle.jhtml?articleID=222600832&cid=nl_at_daily ============= Past experience has demonstrated how other markets have tried and failed to implement transaction taxes. For instance, in the mid-1980s in Sweden, a 1 percent transaction tax was introduced and then doubled. By 1990, more than 50 percent of the volume in Swedish shares traded in London. Fortunately, the taxes were abolished in 1991, and today the Swedish markets are again dynamic and growing. This is a lesson that does not need repeating. =============
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/fp/Canada+oppose+global+bank/2583353/story.html Canada joins South Korea in saying a firm no to any bank or financial transaction tax. Canada telegraphed this at the recent G7 meeting. Canadian banks are Canada's best industry competitive-wise in NAFTA. Canada and South Korea are the G20 host countries this coming year. This one two punch is the end of G20 consensus on FTT or a bank levy or tax. If this holds, the US is now boxed out. Even Democratic leaders said no FTT unless all major financial centers pass a FTT too. Our US-neighbor in NAFTA is saying no FTT or bank tax and financial transactions and banking business would easily move just across the US border. Toronto is not only TV city now but it will become the new Wall Street too. At least NY will still have Niagara Falls on the Canadian/NY border. I think that US Republicans will follow Canada's conservative pledge for no-bank-ruining tax increases (no to all tax increases). If Tories win as expected in the UK, I think the new PM Cameron will follow suit and say no FTT or bank taxes too. German Conservative Free Democrats - in sharing with Merkel's party- will hold the line there too I presume. Sarkozy can rant and rave all he wants and no one will join him. FTT and bank taxes are becoming the identifying-platform for liberals and progressives and it's the funding mechanism for their global climate and social cause initiatives. Plus FTT and bank taxes are the liberalâs populist battle-cry too. Tea-Party low-tax-and-cut-spending populism is stronger than liberal bank-bashing populism. One increasing trend that I don't like is liberals and some others adopting negative rhetoric against "speculators." That broadens the attack on banks to traders too and it supports their argument for a FTT over a bank tax. Someone sent me a reply letter to our Petition from Rep. Kagan of Wisconsin and he used this argument to support HR 4191 FTT. Europeans are questioning speculators over their role in bashing Greece bonds and the Euro. The Japanese Finance Minister challenged speculators this week too suggesting that a FTT is a good idea. Governments in fear of market-forces and wanting to control the banking-markets - and Japan has a history of this - and those who want to control hot money in and out flows - and Japan has a problem with its Yen carry trade - may want to be anti-market with a FTT. That type of behavior usually really costs all investors and taxpayers big-time; it doesn't help investors and taxpayers. We must always counter attacks on speculators.
From the above piece: "Senior Canadian officials are in the midst of crafting a public response to be released shortly, say sources with knowledge of the plan. An official response is required, they say, due to recent public musings from Gordon Brown, the British Prime Minister, that the G20 countries were close to a deal on a financial services tax -- the so-called âTobinâ tax." I don't think Gordon Brown was referring to a Tobin Tax when he said that he thought consensus could be reached on a global banking levy a few weeks ago. From other pieces I've read it sounded like he was referring to an insuranace type levy or a direct levy on the banks and not on transactions (not a Tobin Tax). I guess it doesn't really matter at this point as this just shows that getting full G20 consensus on anything would be very difficult. -Guru
I don't like this. I would not like the situation to remain as is. If no bank tax is created, I sincerely hope media, Main Street... get tired of speculators bashing and Tobin tax or the next couple of years will be very tough.
There's the big error in democratic thinking: "the FTT is good when every nation participates, and it's bad when only a few do so". They see an advantage when all major financial centers participate, so that speculators cannot move their capital to other markets. What they do not see that there is no advantage at all. What they want are nations like Cuba with universal healthcare, universal education, all people "equally wealthy", and market turmoils only when they get hit by hurricanes or earthquakes.
This deputy Finance Minister, i.e. two steps removed from the PM, and a PM-basher over the Iraq involvement, is in fact hardly a mainstream politician, and clearly a trade unions man, so class war as usual, a solitary voice, "Japan's Tobin man": "Senior Vice Minister of Finance Hokkaido Division, All Japan Prefectural and Municipal Workers' Union General Manager, Inquiry Section of Hokkaido Head Office, All Japan Prefectural and Municipal Worker's Union Japan Council of Metalworkers' Unions " [ http://www.dpj.or.jp/english/member/?detail_113=1 ] If you google-translate his website, you will see Brown 2.0 - another heavily indebted nation in desperate need of Other People's Money... ".. a huge expansionary fiscal policy .. central moral hazard and the country dependent on public works projects, including government-dependent, .. collusion between politicians and bureaucrats .. a huge debt for the next generation, .. central bank cut interest rates to zero .. national and local budget deficits led to liability in excess of 700 trillion yen .. the Democratic administration as a responsible party .. a deflationary economy .." and here he criticizes his bosses boss, the current Prime Minister: "deviated from the principles of the Constitution as symbolized by the Iraq issue .. of the current administration's approach to follow the Bush administration .." Here's the Bloomberg interview with the FT's correspondent from Hongkong: Feb. 17 (Bloomberg) -- Ben McLannahan of the Financial Times' Lex commentary team talks with Bloomberg's Erik Schatzker about Japanese Vice Finance Minister Naoki Minezaki's support for a levy on financial transactions called the Tobin Tax to curb market volatility that could threaten economic growth. (Source: Bloomberg): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-gbnyGbjwU "many see Tobin tax as a barbaric relic of the 70's .. we've had the Vice Finance Minister Naoki Minezaki, on his website [WP:SOAPBOX] expressing approval .. I think the Japanese are coming more from a social point of view, talking about the devastation that unlicenced and unfettered [WP:WEASEL] trading can do to an economy, but it is curious in many ways that Japan should be thinking about it just now just when [capital] inflows are [increasing]" Then the FT journalist tried to contradict peer-reviewed research with his personal opinion / original research based on a single example of Brazil where it "seemed to do the trick" [citation needed] You may recall that even on this very board someone posted a link to a blog showing that volatility in Brazil post-tax has in fact increased, which nevertheless can be a simple case of the "post hoc ergo propter hoc" logical fallacy, just like the currency depreciation observed after the introduction of the Tobin tax, and research on multiple datapoints is needed to establish if causality also exists. Notice however "leading questions" asked by Bloomberg, like that demand to show "evidence .. that it worked previously" - yes keep on aiming at your own foot guys and showing us more of your sponsored "evidence" - which real decision-makers like the IMF will safely disregard as unpublished original research, just like for example the entire Baker's output.
Thanks a for the info ZeroSigma, but Japan is also part of the" leading group for innovative financing", so I guess there are people higher than him that are supporters of the Tobin tax. PS: Have you seen the face of the guy in the YouTube video? We shouldn't allow aliens in politics.
I think in the end we'll probably see some sort of tax on banks' liabilities. I think if everyone was on board with a global bank tax (ie the US) then Canada and South Korea would fall into place as well. But again I believe there is no way a Tobin is going to happen (even if they can't get consensus on a global banking tax). -Guru
Canada to Oppose Global Bank Tax http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703983004575073940515139962.html LONDONâThe Canadian government will declare its opposition to a global bank tax on transactions and services, potentially blocking efforts by some global leaders to have the tax adopted world-wide. The idea of an international levy on banks had appeared to be gaining some traction, with European Union President Herman van Rompuy and various national finance ministers all indicating they thought the idea a good one. The Canadian announcement will undercut an effort often led by U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who has been seeking to build a consensus for the tax among the Group of 20 industrial and developing nations. On Friday, Mr. Brown reiterated his desire for a global levy and his belief that it could still happen. "We are now discussing with the IMF and other countries the prospect of a global levy that will embody the contribution global banks should make to the public interest," Mr. Brown said at conference in London. "I hope that all these things can be agreed in the coming months." Still, the Canadian's decision to go public with their opposition is in part based on irritation that Mr. Brown is painting a picture of a global consensus. -Guru