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

[syrenn]

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

Dont forget that this is the woman who feels as if people being on welfare and food stamps is GOOD for the nation.

 

[loosecannon]

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

No she isn't, she is talking about an IMF tax on all currency exchange transactions.

 

[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.

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 **** 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. ***** 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.

If there is an existing tax on the sale of an intangible asset, it is news to me. May I see a link to the federal law that (allegedly) imposes this tax?

 

[The Rabbi]

TooshyLiberal engages in typical class warfare. Yes, taxes only affect "them", they dont affect "us".
Like the yacht tax that practically destroyed the boat building industry in this country.

Memo to Tooshy: When you tax something, you get less of it. Since transactions are what build wealth, why would you want less of that?

 

[daveman]

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

Dont forget that this is the woman who feels as if people being on welfare and food stamps is GOOD for the nation.

That's because she, like many ignorant leftists, confuses the Democratic Party with the entire nation.

 

[Toro]

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

No she isn't, she is talking about an IMF tax on all currency exchange transactions.

Yes she is. A bill has, or at least had, been introduced into the House, to tax all financial transactions, not just currencies. That's what she's referring to in her speech.

Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Bill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[topspin]

Pelosi is the real witch!!!

 

[Tech_Esq]

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 **** 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. ***** 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.

Have you ever heard of rebalancing your portfolio? Of course not, because you are a dumbass. So let me explain.

Rebalancing is used to buy low and sell high over your lifetime of investing as an average individual who hopes to have enough money to retire one day. You should have different assets in your portfolio. How much of each depends on what your goals are and your tolerance to risk. When the percentages change in your portfolio (cuz things go up and down over a period of time) you buy and sell to keep your percentages in line. You do this either based on percentage movement or set time period. (Like quarterly or semi-annually).

Now, if we look at what the idiot who wrote the thing you posted says, it's clear he doesn't know what the **** he's talking about. The fact that you cite him with approval means you know even less.

Anything Pelosi supports is suspect. If she really likes it, it probably involves deconstructing the United States as we know it. The sooner she's in the dust bin of history, the better off we'll all be!

 

[loosecannon]

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

No she isn't, she is talking about an IMF tax on all currency exchange transactions.

Yes she is. A bill has, or at least had, been introduced into the House, to tax all financial transactions, not just currencies. That's what she's referring to in her speech.

Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Bill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

OK, but she explicitly mentioned the G20 in the video in reference to the tax she was discussing. It was at the G20 summit in Pittsburgh that the idea of the IMF implementing a global tobin tax was first introduced to the public via the MSM.

So I think ya'll misunderstood her

 

[Toro]

No she isn't, she is talking about an IMF tax on all currency exchange transactions.

Yes she is. A bill has, or at least had, been introduced into the House, to tax all financial transactions, not just currencies. That's what she's referring to in her speech.

Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Bill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

OK, but she explicitly mentioned the G20 in the video in reference to the tax she was discussing. It was at the G20 summit in Pittsburgh that the idea of the IMF implementing a global tobin tax was first introduced to the public via the MSM.

So I think ya'll misunderstood her

The reason why she mentions the G20 is because the tax has to be coordinated internationally. If the US implemented this tax and Canada did not, then companies would start listing in Canada and brokers would start executing all trades through there.

Fortunately this tax won't happen, and Pelosi knows it. A few countries such as Canada have said this is DOA.

 

[blastoff]

Such dimwit thinking makes perfect sense to Dimocrats. Increase our debt by spending trillions we don't have and then suggest a new tax to help pay for such stupidity. Thank God in less than three weeks, Nance, your future will be relegated back to the cheap seats again. Enjoy the view while you ponder your legacy as Speaker, but you might want to get crackin' on a book that will make you look better. See Jimmy Carter if you need any advice.

 

[loosecannon]

Yes she is. A bill has, or at least had, been introduced into the House, to tax all financial transactions, not just currencies. That's what she's referring to in her speech.

Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Bill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

OK, but she explicitly mentioned the G20 in the video in reference to the tax she was discussing. It was at the G20 summit in Pittsburgh that the idea of the IMF implementing a global tobin tax was first introduced to the public via the MSM.

So I think ya'll misunderstood her

The reason why she mentions the G20 is because the tax has to be coordinated internationally. If the US implemented this tax and Canada did not, then companies would start listing in Canada and brokers would start executing all trades through there.

Fortunately this tax won't happen, and Pelosi knows it. A few countries such as Canada have said this is DOA.

You have it backwards Toro. The Tobin tax originated as a UN revenue stream proposal, was hijacked by the IMF, promoted by the G20 and now is being discussed because the US can not participate in this G20 initiative unless it is legislated or included in some kind of treaty.

The IMF wants a worldwide fund set up in advance to finance future bailouts. IOW tax the financial industry to insure the financial industry.

Links have been provided. She used the words G20 and "tobin tax" because she was referring to the G20 proposal.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Spending is never the problem... we just haven't separated you from enough of your paycheck is always the answer.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Just another Socialist/Progressive Dummy. Seriously,why do people vote for Nancy Pelosi? She's hateful and deranged.

 

[Toro]

OK, but she explicitly mentioned the G20 in the video in reference to the tax she was discussing. It was at the G20 summit in Pittsburgh that the idea of the IMF implementing a global tobin tax was first introduced to the public via the MSM.

So I think ya'll misunderstood her

The reason why she mentions the G20 is because the tax has to be coordinated internationally. If the US implemented this tax and Canada did not, then companies would start listing in Canada and brokers would start executing all trades through there.

Fortunately this tax won't happen, and Pelosi knows it. A few countries such as Canada have said this is DOA.

You have it backwards Toro. The Tobin tax originated as a UN revenue stream proposal, was hijacked by the IMF, promoted by the G20 and now is being discussed because the US can not participate in this G20 initiative unless it is legislated or included in some kind of treaty.

The IMF wants a worldwide fund set up in advance to finance future bailouts. IOW tax the financial industry to insure the financial industry.

Links have been provided. She used the words G20 and "tobin tax" because she was referring to the G20 proposal.

The Tobin Tax came from an economist named James Tobin who proposed it to dampen cross-border capital flows so as to reduce volatility in currency prices. It was to be applied by all governments within their jurisdictions, not from the UN. It was proposed by someone else for the UN 30 years later.

Tobin tax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Financial transaction tax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do you have something on the IMF bailout fund? I haven't seen that.

 

[Charles_Main]

Just another Socialist/Progressive Dummy. Seriously,why do people vote for Nancy Pelosi? She's hateful and deranged.

Because she has a D next to her name of course.

Democrat Constituents usually do not look much further than that when making a voting decision.

 

[loosecannon]

The reason why she mentions the G20 is because the tax has to be coordinated internationally. If the US implemented this tax and Canada did not, then companies would start listing in Canada and brokers would start executing all trades through there.

Fortunately this tax won't happen, and Pelosi knows it. A few countries such as Canada have said this is DOA.

You have it backwards Toro. The Tobin tax originated as a UN revenue stream proposal, was hijacked by the IMF, promoted by the G20 and now is being discussed because the US can not participate in this G20 initiative unless it is legislated or included in some kind of treaty.

The IMF wants a worldwide fund set up in advance to finance future bailouts. IOW tax the financial industry to insure the financial industry.

Links have been provided. She used the words G20 and "tobin tax" because she was referring to the G20 proposal.

The Tobin Tax came from an economist named James Tobin who proposed it to dampen cross-border capital flows so as to reduce volatility in currency prices. It was to be applied by all governments within their jurisdictions, not from the UN. It was proposed by someone else for the UN 30 years later.

Tobin tax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Financial transaction tax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do you have something on the IMF bailout fund? I haven't seen that.

YEAH! Lifted from your own link!

G20 global financial transactions tax

On December 7, 2009 Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives stated her support for a "G20 global tax."[36]

Financial transaction tax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[loosecannon]

EU leaders put transactions tax back on G20 agenda
Published: 18 June 2010 | Updated: 22 June 2010
Printer-friendly versionSend to friend

Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel won EU support for a tax on financial transactions at a European summit yesterday (17 June), even though the idea has found little traction at global level.

In spite of global scepticism, the German and French leaders pushed for the issue to be put back on the agenda of a G20 summit on 26-27 June in Toronto.

"The EU should lead efforts to set a global approach for introducing systems for levies and taxes on financial institutions," read the summit conclusions, which were adopted by unanimity among EU heads of state and government.

"The introduction of a global financial transaction tax should be explored and developed further in [the G20] context," it adds.

The global financial transactions tax (FTT) "is back on the agenda because we wanted it to be on the agenda," German Chancellor Merkel told journalists after the summit.

"We will prepare for the G20 and G8 meetings so that we can go with as united a European position as possible that also covers a bank levy and taxation of financial markets," she added.

EU leaders put transactions tax back on G20 agenda | EurActiv

IMF Studies How to Pay for Financial Sector Rescues

IMF Survey online

January 11, 2010

* Goal to reduce systemic risk, improve burden sharing
* Range of options, including financial sector taxation, being discussed
* Measures need to balance taxation and regulation

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.

Although we will focus principally on the funding challenges posed by potential future crises, we also will examine the efforts underway to recoup the cost of the current crisis. Of course, there are many links between these two, but the analytical approach—and the appropriate policy choices—inevitably will differ in each case.

At the same time, our study will examine which institutions and/or activities should be included, and in the case of future crises, whether a fund should be created in advance of any prospective use. In analyzing the various policy options, important considerations will include bolstering systemic efficiency and effectiveness, including by removing existing distortions and by avoiding the introduction of new ones.

...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

 

[Toro]

I still don't see where it says that a global fund would be set up. I know that the proposals have suggested national funds be set up to deal with financial firm bailouts for each country.

The IMF has studied it. I know that. They have mountains of research in general. But I haven't heard of an international fund set up by the IMF. I'm not saying that is wrong. I'm just saying I haven't heard it. I have heard of international coordination, but that's different.

 

[loosecannon]

I still don't see where it says that a global fund would be set up. I know that the proposals have suggested national funds be set up to deal with financial firm bailouts for each country.

The IMF has studied it. I know that. They have mountains of research in general. But I haven't heard of an international fund set up by the IMF. I'm not saying that is wrong. I'm just saying I haven't heard it. I have heard of international coordination, but that's different.

The IMF can't set up such a fund until participating nations legislate their participation in it.

They are working on generating participation, which is why Pelosi said it still has merit.

26 April 2010: The ITUC has urged G20 finance ministers meeting in Washington on Friday 23 April to support the adoption of a Financial Transactions Tax (FTT) and the IMF, whose ministerial committee meets on Saturday, to design a strategy for the coordinated design and introduction of the FTT among as many countries as possible.

ITUC General Secretary General Guy Ryder responded to the IMF’s interim report for the G20 on “A Fair and Substantial Contribution by the Financial Sector” in the following terms: “We note that although the IMF report devoted only 3 of its 57 pages to the FTT, it recognises that a sufficient basis exists for practical implementation of at least some form of FTT and that implementation challenges are no different from the IMF report’s preferred options”.

The IMF’s proposal to G20 governments is to create a new two-tier tax system: (i) a Financial Stability Contribution (FSC) to fund the direct cost of future bank failures and (ii) a Financial Activities Tax (FAT) levied on “high levels of remuneration” and “excess” profits to cover for the “wider costs associated with financial crises”. Both the FSC and the FAT would apply to all financial institutions, including banks and hedge funds. Ryder noted that the introduction of an FTT is entirely compatible with the IMF proposal of a bank levy to reimburse the cost of bank bailouts, and that there is still considerable uncertainty over the IMF-preferred FAT option compared to the FTT. “The IMF interim report claims that the FAT would apply to ‘excess’ returns as would the FTT, and leaves options open as to its precise design and parameters. It is absolutely essential that low-salary bank employees and consumers of financial services, including households, must not be unfairly penalised by such a tax,” said Ryder. “In contrast, we know with certainty that an FTT would discourage the short-term purely speculative trades that have contributed to commodity- and other asset-price bubbles while encouraging longer-term job-creating investments in the real economy.”

G20 ministers and IMF should endorse financial transactions tax to meet looming public resources gap - ITUC-CSI-IGB

Personally I think it is futile. The financial sector is entirely too fubar to be held responsible even by means of an insurance fund.

The present mortgage securitization mess can not be legally unwound without causing losses greater than the profits that created this mess.

The pursuit of short term profits without regard for long term consequences is it's own kind of natural disaster. Economic terrorism.