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

reply to post by RedDragon


And you're failing at shooting him down.
All the way around. You're such a genius? So, are you in the 1%?

...which would be the optimal outcome. On the other hand you have dark banks which, on the one hand tell you to buy, when they actually bet against you. They win, because they can.

I'm pretty sure, that we will solve this problem. The EU will calm the markets down. Only the UK is interested in holding the status quo, because that's the only thing they have and it's already in decline.

France, Germany and mostly all north european states made it clear (Cypruss), that uncontrolled financial markets are a thing of the past.

If we now could all work together and tax comapanies as if they actually exist and regulate trading, we would all be better off.

reply to post by Kali74


You do realize how many elderly, NOT at all rich people live off of capital gains, right?

reply to post by pjfry


And a tax up front on every trade would go a long way in eliminating the gamblers from the system.

The more people wake up to what a bunch of scam artists run Wall Street, the better off we will all be.

Honestly, I don't see how anyone in the right mind can defend the Big Banks on Wall Street.
They are not in it for you, but for themselves and their well connected cronies.

Taxing them is a small pittance compared to what they are doing to this country!

How do you tax payers like being on the hook for them?

www.huffingtonpost.com...

Wall Street Deregulation of Derivatives - Tax Payers on the Hook

The Bill would transfer up to $245 trillion dollars worth of casino derivatives to the FDIC. Meaning, you - the taxpayer.


They say FU to the American People, I say FU back!

Originally posted by vtr99

Originally posted by bjax9er
why is taxing the only answer to democrat failures?

You give them an inch, and then they want another inch, and another, and another endlessly at hard working Americans expense. Take from the productive and give to the unproductive until we are bankrupt. Well I think that point was here a while ago and we are living on borrowed time. They (The Liberals) used it all up, and then some.

Umm - the invasion of Irag, Afghanastan? Didn't the Bush family dynasty and friends (Rumsfeld, Chaney, etc) get us into that mess? And the couple of trillion dollars of "Hard Working" people sunk into that money pit - not to say the horrible mis-management a out right LOSS of billions. The no bid contracts to Chaney's friends at Haliburton and other properties of The Carlyle Private Equity Group.

I'm sorry but you are living in a delusion.

The government has a spending problem.

Neither Democrats nor Republicans are responsible stewards of the taxpayers money.

They both piss it away as soon as they get it.

I don't mind paying taxes as an American citizen. I DO mind when those taxes are blown trying to figure out why lesbians are fat, or some jackoff using them to benefit some friend in the defense business.

Originally posted by jacobe001
Honestly, I don't see how anyone in the right mind can defend the Big Banks on Wall Street.
They are not in it for you, but for themselves and their well connected cronies.

Taxing them is a small pittance compared to what they are doing to this country!

How do you tax payers like being on the hook for them?

www.huffingtonpost.com...

Wall Street Deregulation of Derivatives - Tax Payers on the Hook

The Bill would transfer up to $245 trillion dollars worth of casino derivatives to the FDIC. Meaning, you - the taxpayer.


They say FU to the American People, I say FU back!

You see, that's just it. You don't care about a surplus. You just want to attack

Wall Street.

Some really interesting things going on in this thread, hopefully I can address them all with this post and answer any posts that were directed to me.

First I'd like to say that I think it's funny that I've somehow been elevated to a status of someone who can actually make this happen. I've also been labelled all kinds of things for simply starting a conversation. I've been told that I hate rich people and want to destroy them (I don't), that I'm a democrat (I'm not), that I'm a progressive (I'm not), that I'm a Statist (absolutely not).

Behind my idea is my personal beliefs and I will try to clarify my thinking but before I do, I'd like to say that IF this tax would truly crash the market, regardless of how corrupt it is, then no I am not in favor it. Crashing the market would be hardest on the already poor and in many cases probably would result in starvation as well as a physical class war, in that case I would like to find a different way. But to those of you who support Wall Street as is don't take that as a victory, because you only win by having the same survival skills as a cockroach yet you're more disgusting or you're too damn stupid to realize that while you rail against globalization and elites and what you call socialism (in the terms that you use the word), you take the collar handed to you with a thank-you sir and clap it around your own necks never realizing that word liberty wears off and reveals the word slave and you have chained yourself to those very things.

A society as large and advanced as ours cannot exist without government, ideologically I'm in the realm of anarchist so trust me when I say that I don't like government, I don't like authority and I don't like this practice of adding more and more laws to the book. I don't like any of it but at the same time I recognize the reality that we don't exist in a paradigm that we can have such a large, advanced society (which I like) without some type of government. To have any kind of functioning order we have to agree to some ground rules (the Constitution) some of which may have to evolve as our society does. And we need taxes to fund it.

Currently we under the thumb of a system that allows those with the most to buy the law makers. You can scream all you want that the rich pay more than fair share, that they pay more taxes than the rest of us do... that they support the poor and so on. Those at the very top, are the top because they rigged the system, just as one poster pointed out that he is writing algorithms that exploit vulnerabilities in day trading (iirc), they rigged it to siphon wealth from every crack they could, up to the top. Some psychopaths may call that dominance of intelligence, but it isn't. There have been plenty of people to call it out, plenty to try and fix it... they're just labelled some flavor of un-American for their effort... so no, you're not thriving by being the fittest, you're only cheating.

I think still, that there could be a way to implement such a tax and that if it could be done it would shrink government, grow the economy, create jobs so that less and less people would be needing any kind of support and can be jointly done with spending limits put in place so that we don't end up in the same sinking boat again.

Originally posted by TauCetixeta

You see, that's just it. You don't care about a surplus. You just want to attack

Wall Street.

They have been at war with the American People to pad their pockets at the nations expense for the last 30 years through every crooked scheme and inflation bubbles and you have the audacity to cry foul when people finally start speaking out and fighting back?

reply to post by Kali74


Sounds like a good plan.



I also purpose they make a Politician Tax. For those rich bastards in Congress........


S&F

(see Kali, I do have a sensible side)

The very sad thing is, that a single government doesn't have the power to hit companies like Apple or Google. They just vanish, but we live in a global society.

If there would be a worldwide tax of 20% for company profits, every sane company would just pay that to the county they work from, cut their gains by 10% and nobody would even notice except the people, who actually live in this world, working, thinking, paying, because they would get a raise and a certain bump in life-quality.

Are you seriously thinking that a military force like the USA can't make the Cayman Islands or Luxemburg force to adjust to international law, beeing backed up by Russia, Europe and maybe China?

So, if we are aware of these simple mechanics, WHO is it, that is slowing the Awareness down?

I don't now, maybe the rich guys...

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Kali74

 

You do realize how many elderly, NOT at all rich people live off of capital gains, right?

And yes many elderly do pay capital gains on their retirement income, the rate determined I believe by how long the asset has been held. By the time most elderly that have pensions and such receive payouts the assest have been held a long time and there are age exemptions as well. Not an accountant - it changes every year - but this would have minimal impact on those of modest means.

I know this is somewhat different then what the OP is talking about and I think it is relevent. It's about a Transaction Tax and the mulitple ways that it would help the economy. It's not a new idea, the US put one into place in the wake of the Great Depression (in fact earlier) The History from a very conservative - anti transaction site: www.ici.org...

When instituted in 1914, the tax on stock transfers was imposed at a rate of 2 basis points (0.02 percent), not 20 basis points (0.2 percent).1 This rate remained unchanged until 1932.
Between 1932 and 1958, this tax was imposed at rates that varied between 4 basis points (0.04 percent) to 6 basis points (0.06 percent).2
In 1959, this tax rate returned to 4 basis points (0.04 percent),3 where it remained until it was repealed in 1965.4
Thus, the 25-basis point (0.25 percent) tax rate included in current proposals is more than four times higher than the highest rate ever imposed on stock transfers, more than six times higher than the 4 basis point tax rate in effect from 1959 through 1965 (the only period during which the tax was applied, as in the current proposals, to market value), and more than 12 times higher than the rate in place from 1914 to 1932.

Now, from a more moderate site on the benefits to THE PEOPLE: www.sourcewatch.org...

The Financial Transaction Tax (FTT), also known as the "Stock Transfer Tax" or "Financial Speculation Tax," is a proposed tax that would impose a small fee on the sale or transfer of stocks, bonds and other financial assets. The tax would raise a large amount of money while discouraging the kind of speculation that helped lead to the economic collapse. The idea originated with economist Nobel Laureate economist James Tobin.
Proposals for an FTT rate are modest -- for instance 0.25 percent on a stock purchase or sale and 0.02 percent on the sale or purchase of a future, option, or credit default swap. These rates are proportional to the actual transaction costs in the industry.
The FTT is sometimes called a "Financial Speculation Tax," as it would have the greatest impact on high-volume, high-speed speculative traders.

For those who don't understand Wall Street. You are GAMBLING your money, when you "invest" your money.

Just think of how many people play the Lottery. That's what the Stock Market is. I don't see this as a 1% or 99% thing. What the hell is a few pennies on the Dollar? The Dollar isn't even worth those Pennies,so................

I see nothing wrong with thinking outside the box, when we have so much debt.

reply to post by Kali74

I think still, that there could be a way to implement such a tax and that if it could be done it would shrink government, grow the economy, create jobs so that less and less people would be needing any kind of support and can be jointly done with spending limits put in place so that we don't end up in the same sinking boat again.

Very well put. I agree. We fully have the capability to make this happen. The only thing standing in our way is indifference, greed, arrogance, and hypocrisy.

Originally posted by jacobe001

Originally posted by TauCetixeta

You see, that's just it. You don't care about a surplus. You just want to attack

Wall Street.

They have been at war with the American People to pad their pockets at the nations expense for the last 30 years through every crooked scheme and inflation bubbles and you have the audacity to cry foul when people finally start speaking out and fighting back?

edit on 23-3-2013 by jacobe001 because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-3-2013 by jacobe001 because: (no reason given)

Wall Street is Free Market Capitalism in action. It's not going anywhere.

Millions of Americans have been "padding their pockets" with growing 401k

portfolios values.

Stop being so negative. It won't work. You are filled with hate.

Originally posted by TauCetixeta

Wall Street is Free Market Capitalism in action. It's not going anywhere.

Millions of Americans have been "padding their pockets" with growing 401k

portfolios values.

Stop being so negative. It won't work. You are filled with hate.

Free Market Capitalism in Action???
I don't know where to even start with this post.

Free Market Capitalism would mean the Banks aren't in bed with the government, that they are surviving on their own without tax payer bailouts. That they are loaning only to the markets and not stealing from the tax payer through Quantitative Easing. I could go on and on with examples.

reply to post by jacobe001


I agree.

We can't see the benefits of free market capitalism because we are too ignorant, we don't see the benefits because they don't exist.

The king is naked.

Originally posted by Kali74
Some really interesting things going on in this thread, hopefully I can address them all with this post and answer any posts that were directed to me.

Thanks for your post. I found it sincere, compassionate and throughtful. A pleasant change from the --- let me say -- frustratingly common response.

I'd like to share a couple of resources that you might find helpful. These are written resouces.

You mentioned (and I paraphrase) something about.."the system is rigged". There is an old saying: "You can't beat the system." It is very true. A direct attack, or approach on any system is doomed to failure for the simple reason that 'systems' will react proportionately to regain their equilibrium. I refer to to two very nice books on the subject of systems - general systems.

The first is Fritjof Capra's "The Web of Life: A New Scientific Understanding of Living Systems" Published in 1997. His final chapter is specifically about economics and the increasing flow of capital to the top.

The next is older, more general, but an important read is Joel de Rosnay's 1979 "The Macropscope" A new world Scientific System. Which can be found, in it's entirety on the Principia Cybernetica project website at

pespmc1.vub.ac.be...

A warning: The subject can be overwhelming. It's is used in every discipline of study. It has been used in constructive manners and very distructive ones as well - but that's a very long and contentious discussion.

I had another one of your subjects to comment upon but can't find your original post in another window - still learning how to do this effeciently. When I find it - I'll continue.

Originally posted by WaterBottle

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by jacobe001

 

The police force also acts as a regulatory body keeping citizens in check, when carried out correctly to the wishes of society.

Until OWS wants to protest the evil corporations and Wall Street, then suddenly the police become evil operatives of the police state.

Are you being serious? Go watch decade old Alex Jones documentaries. Conspiracy theorists have been dissing cops for years.......

Or go listen to some rap made in the 1980's about how evil the cops are.

Cops=evil is nothing new.

I'm glad non-conspiracy theorists are finally realizing how cops do nothing but enforce the status quo.

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

Look at the context of my post compared to HIS post and then you should be able to understand my cynicism. If one expects to use police to protect society, then don't bait them in protests which is what OWS was doing. I remember the live feeds well.
I understand we have elements of police state activity, but people were saying that the police were being paid to oppose protesters. I would be interested to know what budget that came out of.