The end is near.

Discussion in 'Trading' started by Nofear777, Nov 24, 2009.

  1. BSAM

    BSAM

    I predict this ain'tgonnahappun.

    But, what we need is term limits. This would eliminate a myraid of nonsense, including that of which we currently speak.
     
    #41     Nov 24, 2009
  2. Before you blame Bush or Obama, read this article that was written in 1999 (before Bush or Obama) and predicts the economic collapse we're seeing today.


    http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/business/fannie-mae-eases-credit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html
     
    #42     Nov 24, 2009
  3. +1
     
    #43     Nov 24, 2009
  4. Mvic

    Mvic

    What we need is campaign finance reform along with term limits, without the former nothing will change in DC. This past election is proof of that. CFR is the only thing that will stop and reverse the encroachment of corporatism on the public interest amongst our so called representatives in DC.
     
    #44     Nov 24, 2009
  5. BSAM

    BSAM

    Well enough, but term limits would solve that problem also. There's "reasons" why politicians do the things they do.

    But, I'll take it a (big) step further. I propose the death penalty for public officials caught and convicted for corruption. I propose decapitation on CNN on Saturday night during prime time. I'm serious.
     
    #45     Nov 24, 2009
  6. I guess that some in congress just want to end all active trading?? They want to force everyone to buy stocks and hold them...permanently?? Of course the SEC fees will have to go up dramatically also, with the great reduction in trading that is sure to follow.

    It seems that almost everyone is against active trading (not just daytraders) from DTCC, the SEC and now the congress...absolutely incredible.

    Its time for some of you to move on to other money making pursuits that are looked on more favorably by the govt, such as playing craps.

    Not only will the prop trading firms get wiped out, but most of the online brokers will die also. The public is used to the cheap commissions of $4 to $10, so that tax will be very noticeable...even on 500 and 1000 share trades of $50 stocks.

    One can always hope that common sense will prevail.
     
    #46     Nov 24, 2009
  7. This will not only hurt active traders (individuals), but hedge funds, which happen to heavily trade for pension fund clients. The problem with this tax, like almost all taxes, is that the consequences are impossible to predict.
     
    #47     Nov 24, 2009
  8. rcn10ec

    rcn10ec

    So, they want to try to hit trading/traders where it hurts... O.K. then... I say that each congressman/lawmaker/whatever on The Hill get taxed out the wazoo every time they open their fancy leather briefcases and drag out a stack of papers just to read from them some hairbrained dingbat ideas that don't work!!!:mad:

    Listen... can you hear it???... the good ol' US of A, that is.......FFFFFFLLLLLLUUUUUUUUUUSSSSSSHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
    #48     Nov 24, 2009
  9. jjj1000

    jjj1000

    Not a chance that will pass, ever. rest assured. the consequences would be calamitous for the markets, market makers, pension funds, brokers, etc. And then, if they allow an exemption to market makers, that would look even worse: tax the small guy but not Goldman Sachs. it is not going to pass, ever. if it does, I eat my hat. seriously!
     
    #49     Nov 24, 2009
  10. BSAM

    BSAM

    Actually, the consequences are perfectly predictable. For whatever reason, it won't be enough. Those "shortfalls" seem to always appear. Isn't it a funny thing? Yeah, real funny, huh?
     
    #50     Nov 24, 2009