Pelosi: Transaction Tax Has "Great Deal Of Merit"!

[get_involved]

RealClearPolitics - Video - Pelosi: Transaction Tax Has "Great Deal Of Merit"




_______________________________________________

Just SOME of the taxes we pay:

Sales Tax
Hotel Tax
School Tax
Income Tax
Liquor Tax
Luxury Tax
Excise Taxes
Property Tax
Cigarette Tax
Medicare Tax
Inventory Tax
Car Rental Tax
Real Estate Tax
Well Permit Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Inheritance Tax
Road Usage Tax
CDL license Tax
State Income Tax
Food License Tax
Utility Tax
Dog License Tax
Gas Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax



OF COURSE THE DEMOCRATS WANT TO RAISE TAXES! IT'S THEIR ANSWER TO EVERYTHING!

 

[Trajan]

effing VAT in BS DC lingo...its coming too, or that is, thats what they will float... In exchange for not letting the tax cuts expire. watch.

 

[Charles_Main]

RealClearPolitics - Video - Pelosi: Transaction Tax Has "Great Deal Of Merit"

I Imagine she thinks any Tax has merit.

She loves to spend money, it has to come from somewhere.

 

[Mr. H.]

It failed once, it'll fail again.

 

[WillowTree]

That would be the VAT that Charles Krauthammer predicted? And the looney tunes left called him stupid!

 

[Big Black Dog]

Pelosi is a Democrat. Democrats go to sleep at night beating off thinking of new ways they can implement a tax. It's all they know.

 

[Toro]

She isn't talking about a VAT. She's talking about a tax on all financial transactions.

And its one reason why I want the Republicans to win the House. There are too many loopy Democrat ideas to let them control everything.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Merit in her twisted world but they will not have the votes in a few weeks.

 

[FA_Q2]

this is no surprise here as politicians are always looking for the pay dirt and seem to think that taxing the $*&% out of people is going to magically grow the economy. Hmmmm

 

[taichiliberal]

Reality check:

.....A tax of 0.25 percent on the sale or purchase of a share of stock will make little difference to a person who intends to hold the share for 5-10 years as a long-term investment. This tax would cost someone buying $10,000 of IBM stock $25 when they purchase their shares. If the price doubles in ten years, then they will have to pay $50 when they sell. These fees would be dwarfed by their capital gains taxes.

"Similarly, if a farmer had to pay a tax of 0.02 percent on purchasing futures to hedge her wheat crop, the cost for hedging a $400,000 crop would be $80. This expense would have little impact on her decision to hedge her crop or on her income from farming. In fact, since the price of trading share of stock, futures, and other financial assets has fallen sharply in the last three decades, a modest transactions tax would just raise the cost of trading back to where it was 15 to 20 years ago."

Dean Baker: A Financial Transactions Tax



Okay, let me blunt: here we have YET another example of a bunch of neocon/teabagging/birther/PNAC acolyte assholes defending the very people who screw them over. They just don't get it.......the investor class, the Wall Streeters, the corporate owners are about economic dominance. It's not that they couldn't easily afford the pittance of the actual transaction tax, THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO BE MADE TO PAY IT...because God forbid they put a little something back into the society they helped SCREW up. After all, the "wage slaves" don't deserve any help if they weren't smart enough to be one of the financial elite.

WAKE THE FUCK UP, PEOPLE!

 

[Madeline]

Pelosi is insane. If I were a Democrat running for office, my campaign slogan would be "vote for me and I'll have Pelosi bumped off".

 

[Madeline]

Reality check:

.....A tax of 0.25 percent on the sale or purchase of a share of stock will make little difference to a person who intends to hold the share for 5-10 years as a long-term investment. This tax would cost someone buying $10,000 of IBM stock $25 when they purchase their shares. If the price doubles in ten years, then they will have to pay $50 when they sell. These fees would be dwarfed by their capital gains taxes.

"Similarly, if a farmer had to pay a tax of 0.02 percent on purchasing futures to hedge her wheat crop, the cost for hedging a $400,000 crop would be $80. This expense would have little impact on her decision to hedge her crop or on her income from farming. In fact, since the price of trading share of stock, futures, and other financial assets has fallen sharply in the last three decades, a modest transactions tax would just raise the cost of trading back to where it was 15 to 20 years ago."

Dean Baker: A Financial Transactions Tax



Okay, let me blunt: here we have YET another example of a bunch of neocon/teabagging/birther/PNAC acolyte assholes defending the very people who screw them over. They just don't get it.......the investor class, the Wall Streeters, the corporate owners are about economic dominance. It's not that they couldn't easily afford the pittance of the actual transaction tax, THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO BE MADE TO PAY IT...because God forbid they put a little something back into the society they helped SCREW up. After all, the "wage slaves" don't deserve any help if they weren't smart enough to be one of the financial elite.

WAKE THE FUCK UP, PEOPLE!

Before we agree on whether this tax is a good idea, we'd have to agree on whether ANY new tax is a good idea. Then we'd have to agree that raising the rates on an existing tax is less attractive than creating a new type of taxable event, along with new taxpayers and new third party tax collectors and reporters.

Wake me when the recession is over, and we'll talk.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Reality check:

.....A tax of 0.25 percent on the sale or purchase of a share of stock will make little difference to a person who intends to hold the share for 5-10 years as a long-term investment. This tax would cost someone buying $10,000 of IBM stock $25 when they purchase their shares. If the price doubles in ten years, then they will have to pay $50 when they sell. These fees would be dwarfed by their capital gains taxes.

"Similarly, if a farmer had to pay a tax of 0.02 percent on purchasing futures to hedge her wheat crop, the cost for hedging a $400,000 crop would be $80. This expense would have little impact on her decision to hedge her crop or on her income from farming. In fact, since the price of trading share of stock, futures, and other financial assets has fallen sharply in the last three decades, a modest transactions tax would just raise the cost of trading back to where it was 15 to 20 years ago."

Dean Baker: A Financial Transactions Tax



Okay, let me blunt: here we have YET another example of a bunch of neocon/teabagging/birther/PNAC acolyte assholes defending the very people who screw them over. They just don't get it.......the investor class, the Wall Streeters, the corporate owners are about economic dominance. It's not that they couldn't easily afford the pittance of the actual transaction tax, THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO BE MADE TO PAY IT...because God forbid they put a little something back into the society they helped SCREW up. After all, the "wage slaves" don't deserve any help if they weren't smart enough to be one of the financial elite.

Because we all know that more taxes is the only option. God forbid we would actually expect the Federal government to cut back and live within its means like everyone else.

WAKE THE FUCK UP, PEOPLE!

Oh don't worry. They have and they're voting on November 2nd to get people like you out of our government and out of our lives.

 

[taichiliberal]

Reality check:

.....A tax of 0.25 percent on the sale or purchase of a share of stock will make little difference to a person who intends to hold the share for 5-10 years as a long-term investment. This tax would cost someone buying $10,000 of IBM stock $25 when they purchase their shares. If the price doubles in ten years, then they will have to pay $50 when they sell. These fees would be dwarfed by their capital gains taxes.

"Similarly, if a farmer had to pay a tax of 0.02 percent on purchasing futures to hedge her wheat crop, the cost for hedging a $400,000 crop would be $80. This expense would have little impact on her decision to hedge her crop or on her income from farming. In fact, since the price of trading share of stock, futures, and other financial assets has fallen sharply in the last three decades, a modest transactions tax would just raise the cost of trading back to where it was 15 to 20 years ago."

Dean Baker: A Financial Transactions Tax



Okay, let me blunt: here we have YET another example of a bunch of neocon/teabagging/birther/PNAC acolyte assholes defending the very people who screw them over. They just don't get it.......the investor class, the Wall Streeters, the corporate owners are about economic dominance. It's not that they couldn't easily afford the pittance of the actual transaction tax, THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO BE MADE TO PAY IT...because God forbid they put a little something back into the society they helped SCREW up. After all, the "wage slaves" don't deserve any help if they weren't smart enough to be one of the financial elite.

WAKE THE FUCK UP, PEOPLE!

Before we agree on whether this tax is a good idea, we'd have to agree on whether ANY new tax is a good idea. Then we'd have to agree that raising the rates on an existing tax is less attractive than creating a new type of taxable event, along with new taxpayers and new third party tax collectors and reporters.

Wake me when the recession is over, and we'll talk.

Let me bring you up to speed, Madeline......the transaction tax has been in and out of the American scene for a century, regardless of which party is in power. Check the history, because EVERY blessed time Wall St. fucks up, our gov't suddenly decides it's a bad thing. Bottom line, the transaction tax does NOT take money out of yours or mine pocket...it just gets the SPECULATORS to cough up some dough for the general public while their speculations on the products that determine OUR lives make or break us.

 

[taichiliberal]

Reality check:

.....A tax of 0.25 percent on the sale or purchase of a share of stock will make little difference to a person who intends to hold the share for 5-10 years as a long-term investment. This tax would cost someone buying $10,000 of IBM stock $25 when they purchase their shares. If the price doubles in ten years, then they will have to pay $50 when they sell. These fees would be dwarfed by their capital gains taxes.

"Similarly, if a farmer had to pay a tax of 0.02 percent on purchasing futures to hedge her wheat crop, the cost for hedging a $400,000 crop would be $80. This expense would have little impact on her decision to hedge her crop or on her income from farming. In fact, since the price of trading share of stock, futures, and other financial assets has fallen sharply in the last three decades, a modest transactions tax would just raise the cost of trading back to where it was 15 to 20 years ago."

Dean Baker: A Financial Transactions Tax



Okay, let me blunt: here we have YET another example of a bunch of neocon/teabagging/birther/PNAC acolyte assholes defending the very people who screw them over. They just don't get it.......the investor class, the Wall Streeters, the corporate owners are about economic dominance. It's not that they couldn't easily afford the pittance of the actual transaction tax, THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO BE MADE TO PAY IT...because God forbid they put a little something back into the society they helped SCREW up. After all, the "wage slaves" don't deserve any help if they weren't smart enough to be one of the financial elite.

Because we all know that more taxes is the only option. God forbid we would actually expect the Federal government to cut back and live within its means like everyone else.

WAKE THE FUCK UP, PEOPLE!

Oh don't worry. They have and they're voting on November 2nd to get people like you out of our government and out of our lives.

Let me bring you up to speed, "Bro"......the transaction tax has been in and out of the American scene for a century, regardless of which party is in power. Check the history, because EVERY blessed time Wall St. fucks up, our gov't suddenly decides it's a bad thing. Bottom line, the transaction tax does NOT take money out of yours or mine pocket...it just gets the SPECULATORS to cough up some dough for the general public while their speculations on the products that determine OUR lives make or break us.


As for November 2nd, if the current crop to Tea Bagger backed assholes are the best you have to offer, November 2nd may not turn out as you like.

 

[Rozman]

RealClearPolitics - Video - Pelosi: Transaction Tax Has "Great Deal Of Merit"




_______________________________________________

Just SOME of the taxes we pay:

Sales Tax
Hotel Tax
School Tax
Income Tax
Liquor Tax
Luxury Tax
Excise Taxes
Property Tax
Cigarette Tax
Medicare Tax
Inventory Tax
Car Rental Tax
Real Estate Tax
Well Permit Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Inheritance Tax
Road Usage Tax
CDL license Tax
State Income Tax
Food License Tax
Utility Tax
Dog License Tax
Gas Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax



OF COURSE THE DEMOCRATS WANT TO RAISE TAXES! IT'S THEIR ANSWER TO EVERYTHING!

Well there you have it the Libs never met a tax they didn't like.Soon those evil rich bastards who make $250,000 or more living in NYC and running a business ( how dare they both work and live in NYC and make so much money) will have to pay more in taxes thanks to the Libs. The message from this administration is if you apply yourself and take chances and try to make a better life for you and your family,well you stupid fucks you get what you deserve,a thanks from this administration in the form of another tax increase and a hearty f u from those democrats who sit at home and collect those government checks.

 

[Toro]

Reality check:

.....A tax of 0.25 percent on the sale or purchase of a share of stock will make little difference to a person who intends to hold the share for 5-10 years as a long-term investment. This tax would cost someone buying $10,000 of IBM stock $25 when they purchase their shares. If the price doubles in ten years, then they will have to pay $50 when they sell. These fees would be dwarfed by their capital gains taxes.

"Similarly, if a farmer had to pay a tax of 0.02 percent on purchasing futures to hedge her wheat crop, the cost for hedging a $400,000 crop would be $80. This expense would have little impact on her decision to hedge her crop or on her income from farming. In fact, since the price of trading share of stock, futures, and other financial assets has fallen sharply in the last three decades, a modest transactions tax would just raise the cost of trading back to where it was 15 to 20 years ago."

Dean Baker: A Financial Transactions Tax



Okay, let me blunt: here we have YET another example of a bunch of neocon/teabagging/birther/PNAC acolyte assholes defending the very people who screw them over. They just don't get it.......the investor class, the Wall Streeters, the corporate owners are about economic dominance. It's not that they couldn't easily afford the pittance of the actual transaction tax, THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO BE MADE TO PAY IT...because God forbid they put a little something back into the society they helped SCREW up. After all, the "wage slaves" don't deserve any help if they weren't smart enough to be one of the financial elite.

WAKE THE FUCK UP, PEOPLE!

Nobody is going to accuse me of being a neocon/teabagging/birther/PNAC acolyte, but this is a ridiculous tax that does absolutely nothing to solve the problem and merely punishes those who are trying to increase their savings. Its a stupid tax.

 

[Rozman]

I love these people who rationalize these tax increases.They say well these people are rich they can afford it.Well it really only amounts to another 3% out of their pocket.They have enough money they wont miss it.

They never never ever ever question what the f Washington does with the money they already get.They never say hey wait a second don't you guys get enough of our money why can't you do a better job of spending our money.They just bend over and take it,of course it's a lot easier to bend over when it's someone else's money....right Libs

 

[loosecannon]

RealClearPolitics - Video - Pelosi: Transaction Tax Has "Great Deal Of Merit"

If you really care about this topic then read this very carefully:

UN panel suggests new international taxes to help fund development

It not only describes the creation of the global warming industry, but of the carbon credit industry and the international transaction tax industry as well.

Here is a teaser:

Can the financing gap be closed?

UN panel suggests new international taxes to help fund development

From Africa Recovery, Vol.15 #4, December 2001, page 22

As aid from rich countries slides further, a UN independent panel on development financing recently proposed new ways of raising more funds to rescue millions of people from poverty -- most of them in sub-Saharan Africa. In 1999, donor countries gave just $12 bn to the region as official development assistance (ODA), $6 bn less than they gave in 1995. Such aid, even at its peak, fell far short of the continent's needs.

The panel, chaired by former Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo, was set up by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to identify innovative methods for raising the estimated $50 bn needed yearly to implement the UN's commitments to poverty reduction and sustainable growth in developing countries. Its recommendations will be considered by the UN conference on financing for development, to be held in Monterrey, Mexico, in March 2002.

Among the proposals are taxes on the consumption of fossil fuels and on international currency transactions. The panel urges new ways to boost aid and investment flows to poor countries, and to assist countries raise funds from within their own economies through better political and economic management, including by improving their ability to collect domestic taxes. Such efforts would be supported by the establishment of an international tax organization and the holding of a summit that would address problems arising from globalization, the panel stated.

Members agreed that reversing the widening and "shameful" gap between rich and poor countries "is the pre-eminent moral and humanitarian challenge of our age." And sub-Saharan Africa, they noted, should be a priority. "Nowhere is a global commitment to poverty reduction needed more than in this region. Sub-Saharan Africa has the largest proportion of people living on less than one dollar a day, and indeed, its people are almost as poor as they were 20 years ago."

A currency tax

Combating poverty, the panel argued, requires the provision of vital services which strengthen social and political stability, such as peacekeeping, healthcare facilities and programmes for environmental protection -- described collectively as "global public goods." To secure the enormous amount of money needed yearly for that, it said a global system of taxation is necessary, either through a currency transaction tax or a tax on the consumption of fossil fuels.

Much more at link, a must read for all.

 

[loosecannon]

I love these people who rationalize these tax increases.They say well these people are rich they can afford it.Well it really only amounts to another 3% out of their pocket.They have enough money they wont miss it.

Not trying to rag on you specifically but the tax Pelosi was referring to is a tax imposed by the IMF on all currency transactions, as in trading yen for dollars etc.

It won't effect you unless you travel.

IMF Studies How to Pay for Financial Sector Rescues

Last September, leaders of the Group of Twenty (G-20) industrial and emerging market countries, meeting in Pittsburgh, asked the IMF to prepare a “range of options” for “how the financial sector could make a fair and substantial contribution toward paying for any burdens associated with government interventions” to counteract financial sector crises.

IMF First Deputy Managing Director John Lipsky leads the Fund group tasked with preparing the report.

In this interview, Lipsky explains how the IMF will go about its work as it studies various approaches. The final report will be presented to the G-20 Leaders next June, with a preliminary version to be discussed at the G-20 Finance Ministers meeting in April.

IMF Survey online: There’s a lot of interest in the work that the Fund is doing on taxation of the financial sector. What exactly is this about?

First of all, I want to be clear about the subject and scope of our report. We are responding to the G-20 Leaders’ request for an analysis of the various ways in which the financial sector could help to defray the costs of public sector crisis support. Since you mentioned “taxation,” I would stress that while this may provide a convenient shorthand reference for the project, our report will encompass other possible funding sources, including some that resemble user fees......

IMF Survey online: What about the idea of a Tobin tax on foreign currency transactions, or a more general financial transactions tax, which some have proposed?

Of course we will examine all worthwhile proposals. However, the original “Tobin tax” proposal—first suggested by the late Nobel laureate James Tobin—was limited to foreign exchange transactions, and was intended to reduce the volume of such transactions, not to raise revenue. While some contemporary advocates of a transaction tax view it as a means to shrink the size of the financial sector, others are looking to such a measure as a possible source of finance for development purposes. Whatever the merits of this approach, and the worthiness of the overall goal, this is not exactly the issue that the G-20 Leaders asked us to analyze.

IMF Survey: IMF Studies How to Pay for Financial Sector Rescues