You're more sanguine than I. Hope you're right. An acquaintance in DC tells me they'd like to close the offshore loophole by taxing US taxpayers on securities transactions wherever they occur. How that would work, I have no idea, but note that the US is one of two countries in the world (the other being Eritrea) that taxes citizens on worldwide income, so if there's a way, I'll count on them going for it. Make no mistake: There is a hunger on the American left to go after evil "speculators." Btw, re: AOC's Twitter clout, here's an interesting metric: https://www.axios.com/ocasio-cortez-dominates-twitter-6a997938-b8a5-4a8b-a895-0a1bcd073fea.html
Cool. I'll give you 4/1 odds on* that Trump will NOT be the elected POTUS in 2020. Any amount. *That's -400 in American odds.
Why not just bet here? https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/3698/Who-will-win-the-2020-US-presidential-election
Considering the portion of GDP coming from the financial services, it's unlikely they will kill the golden goose, but less sane things have happened before. It would be a bad thing, at the extreme, the financial activity will move offshore completely, of course. On the other hand, I'd give it very low probability - once you're outside the progressive group, the Wall Street money is too important to both sides. I think you are mistaking a fringe group with extreme views for the "American Left". These days, considering where the division is, the "American Left" is where center used to be some 5-7 years ago.
No I’m really not, and if you’re asserting that the Left in this country has moved toward what was the political center then your perspective is unique among political analysts. As for Wall Street money, if there's an exemption for MMs (which there would have to be, which means, of course, the "tax on Wall Street" would be paid on "Main Street") would "Wall Street" necessarily oppose this? Not a rhetorical question. Just wondering if there might be something a bit more Machiavellian at work here than one might, at first glance, assume.
You are betting on an event with a rather well defined binary outcome. It's not any different from a horse race, sports game or an instance of natural disaster. No, I am "asserting" that what used to be center and slightly to the right is now left. The window has shifted, peoples views stayed in place. I used to be right of center (market-driven economically but socially liberal), now I am left of center even though my views have barely changed.
It's different in the sense that the outcome is more susceptible to exogenous events (war, for example). Yes, a meteor could strike a horse race and alter the outcome. But that's quite a bit less likely to occur than, say, war with Iran over the next 20 months. Natural disaster, of course, is the definition of a non-normative event unless you're looking at probability tables, and even then, look how insurers are getting screwed over the frequency of 100-year storms. In any event, I wouldn't lump that would sports betting. Oh, ok. That's sort of my situation, as well. But I wouldn't necessarily characterize that as the center shifting right. The political dynamic is certainly polarized, and that has brought about a degree of realignment. What was once a Rockefeller Republican would now be considered a moderate Democrat. What was once a Yellow Dog Democrat is now called a Republican Deplorable. So it's kind of a scramble. What is clear, at the moment, is that moderates don't have the mojo. Look at the Axios link. The political Twitter Titans are Trump and Ocasio-Cortez. They are the twins from social media hell. That's what drives the debate. That's what has begun to shape policy. Not a negotiation. But a contest of muscle.
Drip-drip-drip... https://www.washingtonpost.com/outl...gressive-ways-raise-much-needed-tax-revenues/