Registered User
Joined: 12/5/2008
Posts: 81
|
I saw this on another forum:
Hello fellow traders,
The potential financial transaction tax was re-introduced in the
house last Friday February 13th by U.S. Congressman Peter DeFazio.
The bill proposed is H.R. 1068: "Let Wall Street Pay for Wall
Street's Bailout Act of 2009". It would inpose a .25% tax on every
stock, option and future transaction. In other words, if you
purchase 1000 shares of a stock at $10, and then sold that same stock
at $10 (for no profit), you would owe the government $50 ($10,000
X .0025 plus $10,000 X.0025). Please understand, this is NOT a tax
on your profit, it is simply a tax on the total amount of your trade.
The link for the aforementioned bill is here:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.1068.IH:
Not only is this proposed tax mentioned in the above bill, it is also
is listed as a line item in "The National Health Care Act" (HR 676
Section 211, Sub-Section C - "Funding".)
The link to that bill is here:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-676&version=ih&nid=t0%3Aih%3A173
There is a petition at the link below that you can "sign" showing
your opposition to this tax:
http://www.rallycongress.com/no2tradertax/1536/tell-congres-to-block-
trader-tax/
I also urge you to contact your own U.S. Representative and let them
know how this tax would negatively affect you.
Thanks for your help,
John
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/5/2006
Posts: 1,148
|
ain't it amazing how these crooks operate.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
Well ...
It's "change" ...
And "change' is all that is important ... right ?
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 2,181
|
I'll keep my guns and my rights, you keep the change.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
QUOTE (tobydad) I'll keep my guns and my rights,.... .
You hope ...
Everybody talks about what a powerful lobbying effort the NRA is ...
So ... why can't they get Democrats added to the Big Game License ?
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 7/1/2008
Posts: 889
|
passage of a tax like this would be enough to start a revolt.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
QUOTE (ben2k9) passage of a tax like this would be enough to start a revolt.
Not in this country of "lemmings" ...
They just voted in a Communist government ...
More taxes must have been what the majority was looking for ....
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 7/1/2008
Posts: 889
|
we get the government we deserve.
Just look at CA if you want a glimpse of where Pelosi & Co wants to take this country. Right into bankruptcy.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
QUOTE (ben2k9) we get the government we deserve.
Just look at CA if you want a glimpse of where Pelosi & Co wants to take this country. Right into bankruptcy.
Exactly ....
If you thought that we were living in a house of cards before ...
Just look at what's happeneing now ...
The country has become so fiscally irresponsible ... that foreign governements do not want to buy US Govt debt ... and the citizens of the US don't even want to buy it ...
So ... the Federal Reserve plans to just print up a bunch of money so that they can buy it ...
The Tier 1 Capital Ratio of the Federal Reserve right now is less than 2% ... if it was a bank ... it would have been taken over by regulators when it fell below 5% ....
It's just one big feddback loop ... that's going to get bigger and bigger ... until it collapses ...
This fiscal year's deficit will be somewhere between $1.5 and $2.0 TRILLION dollars ....
And subsequent years will probably be at least a TRILLION ...
By Obama's own words ... Social Security goes cash flow negative in 2011 ... Medicare becomes insolvent in 2019 ....
But Obama is going to tax the rich to fix this ... right ?
Take a look at what he says is his target group ... people making over $250K/year ....
If you were to take EVERYTHING they make ... and ALL of the wealth that they have amassed over a lifetime ....
Then you would have somewhere around $2.3 TRILLION ...
And these are the people that pay more than half of all income taxes collected ... the people that own businesses and provide jobs ...
And these are the people who are currently buying land and building houses in Costa Rica, Belize, etc ... as they no longer "need" the United States ....
But the United States had better come to terms with how much it needs them ... and it had better do it before the end of next year ....
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 2,181
|
I think it's important for Americans to realize that this proposed law is indicative of the frightening disconnection from justice and the rule of law that has occurred amongst the legislative body in our land. I apologize to those that will be offended by this but the facts are that, by and large, members of the Democratic party drove the collapse of mortgage lenders (a primary driving force in the overall economic collapse). Then they have the unmitigated gall to talk about the evils of Wall Street bankers.
But now we have reached new lows. This proposed bill, in a desperate attempt to garner funds wherever they might be found, will only worsen the situation as many will find it absolutely out of the question to consider investing in companies that are already in drastic need of additional private investing.
This is a flight from reality. (No relation to realitycheck.)
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 7/1/2008
Posts: 889
|
capital goes to where it is treated kindly. The US is becoming hostile to capital.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 3/21/2006
Posts: 4,308
|
Tobydad, you keep trying to re-invent the wheels of inaction and complacency. It is better to blame those that look more attractive with the apple in their mouth and the fine garnish to tempt those that would so dearly want to carve them up.
If indeed you can rest the evils for the forging of the key on those that knew not what Pandora’s Box truly held; you cannot lay upon them the blame for those that then used the genie in this bottle of spirits that inebriated the souls of the wicked and corrupted the greedy. Your own hero and his administration failed us as a nation for eight long years and instead of felling shame you seek to blame the key makers again for all the ills of the world today, In past administrations the strong leaders have risen up to tame the senate, to win their hearts and mind through respect and actions. That is what the people have the power to do; to take action, but they do not. They would rather be herded like sheep and then complain about their lot.
President Reagan was such a man (one of your own but a little to liberal for some of you), he changed the world. He was handed a Nation in crises and deliver to us a mighty country. Look at all the great things that happened around the world during his eight years.
Ok so we might have to endure some pain until we see another great man take the oath to lead this country into greatness once more but we do it because remember the people are to lazy to effect change. You want change? You want a Republican in office that will save us all from those nasty key makers then find one and elect him President. That is the way of things. Right now this new Government needs to find a way to fix the ills that have been laid down by the last administration and they need our help. How else do you fix such a catastrophe? Stop saying that President Bush was good for this country. He has killed us beyond repair maybe. You cannot blame the Senate; it is the Presidents duty to control them, to work with them, to be a leader of men. His staff the watchdogs over bad policy, keys laying around for the wicked to use for evil purposes. So enough about how he was just victim to a Democratic senate. Is that how we want to remember him; that he would have been great if it were not for those pesky Democrats? Give me a break please...
Every time I insert one of these posts in here then it usually spells the end for the thread and that is good. I never get responses back or any answers. Typical Republican response.
Enjoy your new Government everyone. You voted for it...
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 2,181
|
Apsll;
Many of your statements above are right and true. It is unfortunate that you take such offense whenever I speak on these issues. You seem to lose sight of the fact that we should both be objective.
Was George Bush my hero? Absolutely not. In fact, you are completely 180deg off. It is Reagan whom I believe to be one of the greatest presidents we have had in some time. I admire George Bush for one thing in particular; and that is that he was willing to do what he thought was right and for the good of the people no matter how much the media instigated the people to whine and complain against him. He stood his ground because he thought it was right. I will always admire someone who is not gaining from it in any way and stands their ground.
It was interesting to me that CNN recently presented a report on the Top 10 National Security concerns for 2009. The reporter was very surprised to hear that Iraq had been moved off of that list. Why? Because (and, of course, this report could not have been released prior to the November elections) Iraq was so much more stable now. Huh, funny thing; no word of that during Bush's presidency. Now that he has been sufficiently ground into the dirt, we bring up that Iraq is more stable. (And please keep in mind that this was not a Fox report).
The Taliban and their ilk have not taken any vacations from wanting to attack us. Had they succeeded, the media would have villified George Bush for not doing more. But not one word of gratitude from anyone that not one other successful major attack has happened in 8 years. Do you think that's a coincidence? Do you think we just got lucky?
And, while on Iraq, did not the entire Senate vote for the war in Iraq? But once it became unpopular none of them had what it took to admit it and stand behind their vote. America is great because America was once good. Part of being good is saying what you mean and meaning what you say. And meaning what you say means living up to your commitments and finishing what you start...even if it gets difficult. The Taliban are still people that hate us and will do anything they can to destroy. But our shallow, disgusting media wants to politicize everything that happens to the ends that serve their own agenda.
Finally, I invite you, if you are willing, to do some research on the pressure Pres. Clinton put on the big lenders to make "resources more available" to more people so they could achieve the American dream. (Doesn't that sound nice? Only problem? It doesn't work like that.) Have a look, if you're willing, at who put on the pressure to lend big money to people that couldn't afford to pay it back. Look up the names. And look up the names of the people that made some effort to try to stop it. If you're willing to be objective, you may find some eye-opening answers.
As well, you (and most of our country) need a little better understanding of the functions of our civil government. I am amazed at the idiotic comments that either blame or bless a particular president for things over which he has no control. Ask yourself this, who controlled the Congress for the last few years? Do you think they have anything to do with how things have gone. In your elegant post, you went on about the people electing officials. Well, there you go. The people elected those officials. And look at what we got for our efforts. (By the way, they're called the Legislative branch...as in those that create the laws...you know, guidelines by which we do almost everything we do.)
Apsll, I consider you a friend. But you ought to learn something about why some people choose not to respond in some instances. Apparently you don't get it. In many cases, I have said what I wanted to say; you gave your response. It doesn't need to go on and on; we both made our comments. A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. I don't have an emotional need to have a comeback when another man disagrees with me. I don't need or carry around that baggage.
I trust those reading to be intelligent enough to think through what they will, exercise any due diligence they feel appropriate and come to conclusions. If they want to know more about what either of us think, they will ask. You might try learning that before you go on insulting people with your sophomoric and juvenile comments like "I never get responses back or any answers. Typical Republican response." Learn to think a little before you speak. It will help you not to alienate people.
Still your (annoyed) friend
Tobydad
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 10/7/2004
Posts: 2,181
|
I challenge the Administrators not to delete this thread. It is relevant and germaine to the national discussion that affects our economy and, thus, is arguably relevant to trading and in the best interest of your clients and constituency.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 7/1/2008
Posts: 889
|
QUOTE (Apsll)
Every time I insert one of these posts in here then it usually spells the end for the thread and that is good. I never get responses back or any answers. Typical Republican response.
I like to keep my political conversations on a short leash online. I've never once had a productive political debate. Neither side is interested in being influenced.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 3/21/2006
Posts: 4,308
|
Tobydad of course we are still friends. It is just that I do not like anyone making comments that the Democrats are to blame for everything. I understand and I do know that the Democrates where the initial lawmakers that helped to open the door for bad lending practices, but they did not tell the "Financial intitutions" to fleece America and destroy our economy. The Democrates screwed up for sure but what you do then is fix the problem, you do not let the fire burn down the country and then point fingers at those that gave the silly chidren the book of matches.
I also do not care if I alienate any one. Folks know me for what I am. If they do not like it then they can just @@@@ ###.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/5/2006
Posts: 1,148
|
regarding whose to blame, lets just say the democrats are in power now. they got elected, now they must govern. and they will be held accountable for their agenda, as bush and the republicans were when they controlled the government.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/19/2004
Posts: 415
|
[QUOTE=realitycheck...
But Obama is going to tax the rich to fix this ... right ?
....
[/QUOTE]
And because you are in the market, you are labelled the rich. Go figure this little puppy out, the "market" can pay for the bail out, according to Mr. DeFazio [url]http://84rules.wordpress.com/2009/02/18/democrats-propose-new-tax-on-stock-trades-hr-1068/[/url]. Now who is going to pay for the housing bailout, Detroits car industry, banks?
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 12/19/2004
Posts: 415
|
And I forgot to add that this little bill was proposed by Democratic representatives. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, it must be a duck.
I am not blaming anyone for past ills, but only pointing out that this disaster should not be even brought up for a vote.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/5/2006
Posts: 1,148
|
QUOTE (bknight) [QUOTE=realitycheck...
But Obama is going to tax the rich to fix this ... right ?
....
And because you are in the market, you are labelled the rich. Go figure this little puppy out, the "market" can pay for the bail out, according to Mr. DeFazio http://84rules.wordpress.com/2009/02/18/democrats-propose-new-tax-on-stock-trades-hr-1068/. Now who is going to pay for the housing bailout, Detroits car industry, banks?
[/QUOTE]
didn't they say the bailout was paid for? that these were actually investments?
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 5/1/2007
Posts: 158
|
Actually, it would be .25% per round trip. That is,
buy 100 shares at $10, pay $10,000 - seller receives $10,000 - $25 = $9,975
sell 100 shares at $10, receive $10,000 - 25 = $9,975 loss $25, not $50
As an active trader, I hate it.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/21/2007
Posts: 797
|
you mean that you don't want to give some more of your hard earned money to the govt?
that's not being very supportive of our govt. since they are taking such excellent care of us.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 5/1/2007
Posts: 158
|
Government service = being serviced by the government
This will be the fifth profession of mine legislated out of existence. I was weeks away from lauching an information on web sporting site, but even spreading the info was deemed a felony.
Let's see: day trader, teacher - I was one course away from getting a teacher cert when President Bush's "No Child Left Behind" meant I would have to go three more years, full time. H1 visas took away 70% of the American programming industry - tax law - I won't be an unpaid informer to the IRS.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 3/16/2007
Posts: 20
|
I hope this gets shot down in flames!
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/21/2007
Posts: 797
|
nope: too much money involved. bend over and grab your ankles. if we're lucky maybe they'll use some of that new lubricant that's advertised on tv.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 3/21/2006
Posts: 4,308
|
I might be a Democrat but even I am not for this tax of course. I do know that Obama is trying to generate revenue for his plans but this one hits to close to home for my liking. I agree with John on this however - to much money involved.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 3/21/2006
Posts: 4,308
|
John, according to your post on the now locked thread You have documented why the last five presidents have been largely in effective
Quote Johnlc:
what reagan did for the economy i'm really not sure about, other than he rebuilt our military after the carter administration basically dismantled our military. under the carter administration we couldn't even fly 3 helicopters into iraq( the beginning of the war on terror) to rescue the hostages in our embassy.
clinton they call him the do nothing president. everyone thought it was wonderful that he balanced the budget, but that was a shell game, as described by van tharp in his book.
g.w. bush (#1) read my lips "no more new taxes" 6 months into office, "well i guess we're going have to raise taxes" that finished his administration.
g.w. bush (#2) maybe the most difficult presidency since wwll.
But we have had prosperity under two liberal administrations (Reagan 8 years and Clinton 8 years), one bad under a liberal adminstration (Carter 4 years), and two horrible under conservative administrations (Bush Sr & Bush Jr). So it was not all bad and I do believe that a good answer is somwhere hidden in a partisan government. That means that conservative and liberal parties finding common ground and build the foundation for change upon that ground so that America can be America again. I know it sounds corny but just as I said before that Reagan was the best Preident that I think that we ever had and he was a Republican.
I also know that your early impressions of me and also for a few other new members is that of a Mr know it all and sometimes disagreeable. I guess it is my nature to be semi abrasive or straight to what I believe in. But I can assure you that I get along with 95% of all here that know me. There are four charactors on this forum that I have a very low tolerance for and you will see that it is always the same four. I will not mention them as I do not want this thread to also be locked.
Good luck in your learning to both you and Craig.
Apsll.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
Wow ....
I didn't know that Reagan was a liberal president ...
I learn something new here every day ...
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 3/21/2006
Posts: 4,308
|
Most intelligent folks do anyway. I made it easy for you just google this phrase and enlighten your self Reagan a liberal or conservative.
You know RC most of our problems could be minimized if you would just stop thinking of yourself as somthing that you are not.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 3/21/2006
Posts: 4,308
|
http://news.aol.com/newsbloggers/2008/02/01/ronald-reagan-was-a-liberal-compared-to-current-republicans/
This is one of many links that show that some thought him a liberal Republican.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
I remember a line from his 1980 campaign ...
"Back before we had all of these government programs ... like welfare and WIC and the like ... people in need were helped out by their neighbors ... and their community churches ... and these people got a good feeling from that ....
I want to give them that good feeling back ! "
Ragan was not an especially brilliant person ...
He simply surrounded himself with brilliant people ... and let them do their job !!
All of the liberals say that trickle down economics didn't work ... yet it was the only time since around 1960 ... when the Democrats became the self-proclaimed defenders of the poor ... that the lowest quintile of wage earners actually gained ground against inflation ...
Any economic policy ... that does not make the rich poorer ... while making the poor richer ... is deemed to be a failure by the liberals ...
The pro-business growth policies of the Regan administration ... launched our economy into a great bull market ... and like most bull markets ... was characterized by three very distinct upward waves ... and Clinton was lucky enough to be sitting in the cat bird seat during the third, final, and always largest wave ...
Although he tried his best to derail it ... with the largest tax increase in the history of mankind (The Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1993) ... Republicans gained a majority in both houses of Congress for the first time in US history in 1994 ... and blunted his attempts ... leading to the only budget surplus (on paper) in a very long time ...
Presidents are not not responsible for deficits or surpluses ... since all spending must ... by Constitutional mandate ... begin in the House of Representatives ... these are the people to blame for deficits ... or praise for surpluses ....
Regan's policies caused great economic growth ... but his Congress constantly pissed away far too much ...
If you look at a chart of the US National Debt ... where does it start to go parabolic ?
Now the world is faced with the last bastian of capitalism ... being controlled by Leninists ...
And from what I can tell of the market averages ... they're not too thrilled about the prospects ...
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 2/5/2006
Posts: 1,148
|
QUOTE (Apsll)
There are four charactors on this forum that I have a very low tolerance for and you will see that it is always the same four. I will not mention them as I do not want this thread to also be locked.
Apsll.
its not the four characters on this board you have trouble with, its the truth you have trouble with.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 3/21/2006
Posts: 4,308
|
Look Reality I will grant you that I am not the best of historians but you read some of those articles. Why would they say these things about Reagan? Ok my information comes from such articles and it is true that you cannot believe everything that you read. I have heard your arguments from some and different points of view from others. Some will say that liberals or Democrats are Evil and some that Republicans will bankrupt this country. Politics is like religion; very complex and is your view the accurate and correct view? I do not know. Liberal or conservative I think that we both agree and I know that Tobydad does also that we need a Ronald Reagan right about now.
If you want to continue to bash Democrats I guess that there is nothing that I can do about it. I do not agree with your points of view but you are entitled to them of course.
|
|
Registered User
Joined: 9/25/2007
Posts: 1,506
|
Frankly ...
I just can't understand how you can say that we need a Ronald Reagan ... yet support OBAMA ...
As they are at opposite ends of the idealogical spectrum ...
It's like working at Jewish Community Center ... and saying how much we need another Adolph Hitler ...
|
|
Administration
Joined: 9/18/2004
Posts: 3,522
|
Locking the thread. It's drifted way off topic.
Ken Gilb (Kuf)
Chief Software Engineer - Worden Brothers Inc.
Try/Catch - My RealCode Blog
|
|
|
Guest-1 |