BluesLegend
Diamond Member
When Dems say "I'm going to help you with a new tax" I say rot in hell Dems you lying lowlife scum!
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Howsabout we not spend $20 billion on environmental justice bullshit instead? You have no problem with that, huh?Do you think the few billion they claim this will raise is gonna lower our debt?All these taxes start to add up
Our debt isn't?
You really are stupid.
It's a start. Did you think adding to the debt was going to lower our debt?
Now you claim you will after defending Pedo Joe's "infrastructure" boondoggle.
You said Pedo Joe was addressing it...............when I show he is worse than Trump you cheer it.Veggie Joe is on pace to make it go up around $48 TRILLION.All these taxes start to add up
Our debt isn't?
So stop the pork in bill, reduce spending
I'd hate to see a democrat's personal budget
LOL, debt went up $8 trillion under Trump. You expect Democrats to do what Trump would not? They are at least addressing one side.
Good. I hope it all falls apart.
And you claim others are hypocrites.
Because the HFTs won't "front-run" any trades stealing value from buy-and-hold investors.Don't just look at the tax, look at your 401K bump w/o high-frequency traders. Its a benefit, not a tax.
If I'm a buy and hold in my 401k, how does eliminating HFT give my 401k a bump?
So your spouse/teenager spend you into oblivion. They won't have a serious discussion about cutting their spending so you just throw your hands up and agree to their demands YOU just need to give them more money?Cut spending. We haven't paid for our spending to begin with. If we had we wouldn't be in debt.You mean SPENDINGAll these taxes start to add up
Our debt isn't?
Spending that has led to massive debt. Why shouldn't we pay for that?
CUT SPENDING
When people actually start voting for that I will take the argument seriously. Until then I'm going to go with realities.
That's the most fucked up way of looking at spending ever.
Robbing Peter to pay Paul is still robbing- stopping the theft would end a myriad of problems- most notably, legalized theft. graft and corruption are close behind- adding to the coffers by theft means you approve of theft as long as it's not you being robbed- but, when it's you being robbed it's somehow the other guys fault- SMH
LOL.So what we have here is a proposal to start paying for things and you are still against that?
"I" pay MY credit cards every month with my left over allownace Uncle Sham allows me to keep, that "I" earned- the fed gov't steals everything- it owns no means of producing wealth- it steals the fruit of your labor-Paying your debt is not robbing anyone.
What are Dems planning to spend the tax money on hmmm?
When big investors buy any stocks that you have, the high-frequency traders steal some of the investment.
You're the drama queen whining about something you apparently know very little about.
What are Dems planning to spend the tax money on hmmm?
"I" pay MY credit cards every month with my left over allownace Uncle Sham allows me to keep, that "I" earned- the fed gov't steals everything- it owns no means of producing wealth- it steals the fruit of your labor-Paying your debt is not robbing anyone.
So you oppose Pedo Joe's "infrastructure bill" now.Howsabout we not spend $20 billion on environmental justice bullshit instead? You have no problem with that, huh?Do you think the few billion they claim this will raise is gonna lower our debt?All these taxes start to add up
Our debt isn't?
You really are stupid.
It's a start. Did you think adding to the debt was going to lower our debt?
Now you claim you will after defending Pedo Joe's "infrastructure" boondoggle.
Find where I supported spending $20 billion. I'll wait.
1. Only a real drama queen would whine about a $100 or so tax increase.OMG, $100 per year is meaningful to you? You living under a bridge somewhere?Yes, for every $1,000 you pay $1 in tax.1. I'm not a "phony conservative", you know the coxuckers who vote for tax cuts and then borrow trillions, aka "bubble makers".You can’t ever call yourself a conservative if you support government socially or financially engineering society. There’s enough taxation in this country. ENOUGH.I never thought that I'd ever be on the same side as Ilhan Omar, but here we are.
I support the proposed transaction tax. It will hit the high-speed traders more than me or other "buy and hold" investors.
The argument against it is that high-speed traders will just move off-shore to do their trades, fine.
They are nothing but leeches stealing our 401k investments.
Senate Democrats reintroduce bill to create financial transaction tax
A group of Democratic senators on Thursday reintroduced legislation to create a financial transaction tax, arguing that such a tax would help to reduce economic inequality.The bill would establish …thehill.com
"This (transaction tax) makes financial markets fairer and possibly less volatile. As described by Michael Lewis in Flash Boys, high frequency traders (HFTs) can earn profits by front-running other trades by micro-seconds, an activity that raises costs for legitimate traders and provides no value to society. HFTs account for roughly half all stock trades and much of their business model would be threatened by the proposed transactions tax.Congress wants to tax stock trades. Investors shouldn't fret. | Brookings
Aaron Klein makes the case for a financial transaction tax.www.brookings.edu
Under current law, someone selling or buying $1,000 of stock pays just over two cents in transaction taxes. This existing fee raises over $1.5 billion per year. The proposal would add a tax of $1 to that transaction."
2. I support the transaction tax. The $1 per $1000 BOT/SLD will hit the high-frequency traders, not "buy and hold" investors.
3. $30T DEBT is ENOUGH.
I support the transaction tax. The $1 per $1000 BOT/SLD will hit the high-frequency traders, not "buy and hold" investors.
If I buy $1000 of stock, I won't get hit with a $1 tax?
So how much a year would you probably pay?
I'd pay less than $100 a year.
I don't do a lot of trades.
Yes, for every $1,000 you pay $1 in tax.
So this claim, was a lie.
The $1 per $1000 BOT/SLD will hit the high-frequency traders, not "buy and hold" investors.
How does that $100/yr compare to your broker fees + income taxes?
I will gladly pay $100/yr for $80b in new tax revenue.
IMHO its a net gain w/o high-frequency traders stealing our 401K investments.
OMG, $100 per year is meaningful to you?
Only in the context that you said it wouldn't hit me. So you lied.
How does that $100/yr compare to your broker fees
Well, my broker fees are currently $0
I will gladly pay $100/yr for $80b in new tax revenue.
If you think it would raise $80b in new revenue.......I've got some bad news for you.
Did you ever find out how much the HFT firms make every year?
What are Dems planning to spend the tax money on hmmm?
Because the HFTs won't "front-run" any trades stealing value from buy-and-hold investors.Don't just look at the tax, look at your 401K bump w/o high-frequency traders. Its a benefit, not a tax.
If I'm a buy and hold in my 401k, how does eliminating HFT give my 401k a bump?
HFTs don't "invest" they "steal" investments.