This has been discussed very heavily here on multiple threads over multilpe months by many people. Do a search, like on 0.25
In the section of that U.N. document where it talks about the causes of the economic crisis, nowhere does it mention short-term trading of equities, futures, options ... etc - anything on Wallstreet that the public has access to. I didn't read the whole thing, but where does the document make the case for taxing these markets as a justifiable solution for anything?
Another ET-genius: Here, use my spoon: "98. Estimates of the revenues from a currency transaction tax range from $15 to $35 billion. However attractive the tax might be in terms of revenue potential, its implementation is constrained by a number of obstacles. Particularly, the tax base will have to be defined so as to exclude certain transactions that provide very short-term liquidity to markets (e.g., when this tax is applied at the national level, interbank lending is usually exempted) and special treatment for derivatives to avoid double taxation. It will also have to be protected from erosion, for even if all major financial centres participate, there is a risk that smaller centres will attract an increasing volume of activity from those wishing to evade the tax. Finally, strong opposition by a number of stakeholders would have to be overcome. 99. Alternatively, a levy on trade in shares, bonds and derivatives could be introduced. Implementation would be easier than in the case of a currency transaction tax, as a small number of participating countries suffices at the beginning. In later stages, over the counter and currency trading could be included. Large stock exchange centres exhibit positive agglomeration externalities; therefore a small tax would not lead to a flight of trade towards alternative, smaller exchanges."
This topic is old news. I can't believe people are still worrying over this. It's not happening, so move onto something else.
Some would say that this thread was started to generate "web-activity" near the end of the month for ET, so that ET can provide metrics such as web "hits" to current and prospective advertisers. Why else would a user name that was registered way back in 2005 "come out of a cave" in the last month to create such a thread like this ( with a CNBC video from March no less ) when this TOPIC has been discussed ad-nauseum in this Forum? I believe that these kinds of threads/posts are totally disengenuine, and are the single greatest reason why ET has gone down the tubes the last couple of years.
Ha ha... well, I never thought I would be accused of being a troll for ET, but I guess there's a first time for everything! The truth is that I haven't been reading ET for a while, and when I did a search on the topic I couldn't find anything about this. I figured it had already probably been discussed, but I just wanted a quick update on whether or not it was likely to pass... it was the first I had heard of it!
Your ability to use the SEARCH function is absolutely horrible . . . http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=150546&highlight=De+Fazio 961 replies, 94,104 views
I'll excuse your comprehension impairment. I was referring to the short version (2nd link you posted) where they addressed the specific causes of the crisis. Again - equities/commodities/options trading was NOT mentioned as a CAUSE. Of course they can suggest slapping a tax on anything they want ... my point was they did not establish any linkage between the causes of the crisis and a potential transaction tax.
Yeah, yeah, I know... people have already mentioned that on this thread. It was a QUICK search... anyways, obviously some people on this forum still seem to want to talk about it!
Mods, PLEASE close this thread. We already have too many threads as it is. And this overeager newbie cannot bring him self to continue one of the many existing ones...