You could have said the same about the online poker ban. The market never saw that coming either. With such key issues it's important to be vigilant and pro-active. A stitch in time saves nine.
Are you seriously a trader? Only amateurs and politicians blame the shortsellers for this mess. And professionals go long AND short.
They are. I am so fucking sick of these piece of shit communists. FUCKING RESPONSIBLE?? ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME? GOD I HATE THESE PRICKS.
The black boxes, which represent over 50% of the volume on most exchanges and that arb the shit out of everything would also be affected. Liquidity would really go to hell, this cannot be allowed to pass.
Looks like we might be safe for now: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE48O7X720080925 I think the responses detailing how it will effect liquidity and such should probably be directed to Pelosi's office herself and perhaps to the renegade Republicans that actually listened to the responses they got from economists about the bailout plan. It sounds like this DeFazio guy has it out for all short-term traders. Traders complaining is probably music to his ears. Anyone know any respected economists that we can get up in arms?
Here's the actual proposal. They were just talking about companies paying a premium to the government to have their bonds insured. I don't like the way they titled it, but this is what the actual proposal said (this was linked to in the article): I. Wall Street - Not Taxpayers - Should Fund the Recovery The most troubling part of Sec Paulson's plan is that it relies wholly on taxpayer funds. House Republicans believe that rather than providing taxpayer funded purchases of frozen mortgage assets to solve this problem, any rescue package should adopt a plan to insure mortgage backed securities (MBS) through payment of insurance premiums. Currently, the federal government insures approximately half of all MBS and can insure the rest of those still outstanding. However, rather than taxpayers funding the insurance, the holders of these assets should pay for it. The working group's proposal would direct the Treasury Department to design a system to charge premiums to the holders of MBS to fully finance this insurance.
Okay, I wrote a letter. Please feel free to cut and paste and use it. Also, *please* comment because it's been a long while since I've written much of anything. I'll revise it based on comments. http://susannahscratchpad.blogspot.com/
The proposal you're referencing is from the House Republicans. The "transaction tax" idea is a separate proposal from a group of Democrats.
I know, that's why I quoted huh. I was referencing what he said. He was inferring that Republicans might go along with this Democrat proposal because of the ominous way the Republicans had titled their proposal. I was just stating that the actual proposal by the Republicans was sane and made sense, despite the ominous title.