Our Economy Could Be In Surplus In Less Than A Year With A 1% Wall Street Sales Tax

reply to post by RedDragon


He's SAVING, and avoiding CREDIT. Doy.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by RedDragon

 

He's SAVING, and avoiding CREDIT. Doy.

So then he's not in the area of trading, and you're using him as an expert on trading?

reply to post by RedDragon

I can only guess that you want the system to sell to people at prices they don't like

Oh, yeah, like people want to pay $4 for a loaf of freaking BREAD? Nearly that much for a gallon of GAS?
:shk:
So ridiculous.

reply to post by RedDragon


Read my post above for his background. He's worked as an IT specialist for MAJOR BANKS. He's extremely well-respected in his field of expertise, with overarching knowledge of the system that's embarrassing to the managers and "team leaders" in the industry, for crying out loud! But they listen to him. So there.

Gha.

The point is to eliminate computerised algorithm modulated, millisecond trades, which are common these days.

If people can't trade efficiently and only companies with giant computerfarms can, something is going wrong.

Regulation and Supervision of the financial markets and proper taxing of big companies is the key stone to a transparent capitalism with a social (human) component!

Keep that in mind...

www-03.ibm.com...

This is a try to even accelerate these trades with very fast quantum computers. Just look who is sponsoring these efforts...

We are doomed.

reply to post by wildtimes


Exactly, it's not easy for a small fry. Even at a fantastic ROR annually of 20% it would still take 3.6 years to double your money. If you start out with 10,000 that's only increasing to 20,000 and then to about 40,000 in 7 years. AND that is with a fantastic return which is incredibly hard to maintain in the long run. It takes time.

reply to post by bgold1212

With that being said, this thread isn't about government spending.

This thread is about paying off government debt, by taxing the sector of the economy that created the debt in the first place.

Originally posted by bgold1212
reply to post by AwakeWeAre

 

I also hate the income tax. There should be a flat tax on spending. A consumption tax if you will.

so...if i make 25,000 bucks a year, and have to spend all of it just to live, i get taxed on all the 25,000....but, if i make 1,000,000 bucks a year, and only spend 200,000 bucks, that's what i'm taxed on
so...the poor person pays tax on 100% of his income, while the millionaire pays tax on 20% of his income....right...good idea

Originally posted by pjfry
The point is to eliminate computerised alogorithm modulated, millisecond trades, which are common these days.

If people can't trade efficiently and only companies with giant computerfarms can, something is going wrong.

Regulation and Supervision of the financial markets and proper taxing of big companies is the key stone to a transparent capitalism with a social (human) component!

Keep that in mind...

edit on 23-3-2013 by pjfry because: (no reason given)

There is a social component with automated algorithms. A key component of trading takes into account our psychology of how we feel which reflects stock prices.

reply to post by jimmyx


That's why there needs to be a tax rebate on a minimum amount of consumption spent. For example anyone consuming 25,000 or less will get a full rebate.

Originally posted by bgold1212
Unfortunately this post is buried on the 18th page but I will effectively debunk the absurdity behind a theoretical 1% tax on ALL trades.

The OP claims it will cover the budget deficit in one year! First of all, half the trades occurring are fully automated algorithms that trade at lightning fast speeds. They buy and sell all within the minute. A lot of these trades use millions of dollars to make less than .001% off a trade. In short, trading would become completely inefficient and slow to an almost nonexistent halt..

This is totally untrue. How did they ever manage to trade before the computer came along?
The algorithms and programs allow them to just sit back and do nothing while they steal from other people.

Without the pc they may have to do a little bit of work.

Originally posted by bgold1212

Originally posted by pjfry
The point is to eliminate computerised alogorithm modulated, millisecond trades, which are common these days.

If people can't trade efficiently and only companies with giant computerfarms can, something is going wrong.

Regulation and Supervision of the financial markets and proper taxing of big companies is the key stone to a transparent capitalism with a social (human) component!

Keep that in mind...

edit on 23-3-2013 by pjfry because: (no reason given)

There is a social component with automated algorithms. A key component of trading takes into account our psychology of how we feel which reflects stock prices.

So what you say is, that we can chill out, because the algorithms calculate how we may react in certain environments? Is this a good thing in your opinion? Are you sane?

reply to post by jacobe001


Excellent post. Well put.

When you look at economic history, it is easy to see how all of these parasitic wealth bubbles wreck healthy economies.

It is the same thing that keeps poor countries poor. A parasitic upper class develops that kills the economy, and the market shrivels.

the republicans never wanted a balanced budget or to pay down the national debt....they had the chance when bush first came into office. they could have continued to slowly pay down the national debt with government surpluses, and they quickly changed that back to creating more government debt...jesus, this is fact, it's there in black and white, in the history books, on record....and yet somehow, people still believe that republicans are the responsible ones....talk about DENYING IGNORANCE, how about denying recent factual history.

The only problem is that the tax would be used to fund some politicians pet project. U seriously think Washington wants to balance the budget? All it really does is steal from the free market to fund anti free market insiders.

Originally posted by pjfry

Originally posted by bgold1212

Originally posted by pjfry
The point is to eliminate computerised alogorithm modulated, millisecond trades, which are common these days.

If people can't trade efficiently and only companies with giant computerfarms can, something is going wrong.

Regulation and Supervision of the financial markets and proper taxing of big companies is the key stone to a transparent capitalism with a social (human) component!

Keep that in mind...

edit on 23-3-2013 by pjfry because: (no reason given)

There is a social component with automated algorithms. A key component of trading takes into account our psychology of how we feel which reflects stock prices.

So what you say is, that we can chill out, because the algorithms calculate how we may react in certain environments? Is this a good thing in your opinion? Are you sane?

I don't look at it as a good or bad thing. It's reality, and it's a way to make money.

reply to post by jimmyx


This is essentially how the current system works. 99.999% of the people pay tax on 100% of the money they earn, while the .001% pay taxes only on a fraction of what they earn.

Even though most government spending almost exclusively benefits that .001%.

Originally posted by jimmyx
the republicans never wanted a balanced budget or to pay down the national debt....they had the chance when bush first came into office. they could have continued to slowly pay down the national debt with government surpluses, and they quickly changed that back to creating more government debt...jesus, this is fact, it's there in black and white, in the history books, on record....and yet somehow, people still believe that republicans are the responsible ones....talk about DENYING IGNORANCE, how about denying recent factual history.

edit on 23-3-2013 by jimmyx because: addition

What are you trying to imply? That democrats are more fiscally responsible? The only reason there was a "surplus" under Clinton was due to new accounting tactics.

Both parties are equally responsible for botching the budget.

reply to post by amfirst1


Wall street is the last place to look for a free market when many of the politicians exist in a revolving door between the big banks and Dc

reply to post by poet1b


I think you should read up on the U.S. progressive tax scheme instead of making up numbers that make no sense.