"Fiscal Cliff" - Increasingly Likely & Desirable? | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 19816311 11/29/2012 11:45 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 27211004 11/29/2012 11:50 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Steve8511 User ID: 3152525 11/29/2012 11:52 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| _KiLLuMiNaTi_ (OP) User ID: 24723887 11/29/2012 11:56 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | It all doesn’t matter…. No amount of kicking the can down the road will save this country from what’s coming. Quoting: Steve8511 We can tax half the richest people in the US 100% of their money and we’re still screwed. its just the ignorant people in this country have ruined it Don't be a sheeple!!!! |
| anonanon User ID: 4148733 11/29/2012 11:58 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Ultimately, we will all pay. Perhaps it is time to just let it all collapse and then rebuild. We know if we just give those in DC and the White House more money, they will just spend it and waste it on all sorts of things and all sorts of crazy grants and earmarked projects added on to every bill in Congresss. You can bet it will not be just the "rich" who pay for it. It is Obama's disaster now....no more blaming Bush. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 27211004 11/29/2012 11:58 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | It all doesn’t matter…. No amount of kicking the can down the road will save this country from what’s coming. Quoting: Steve8511 We can tax half the richest people in the US 100% of their money and we’re still screwed. True. It's racial degradation coupled with america falling away from god thats the problem, and it happened many decades ago. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 961432 11/29/2012 11:59 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | It all doesn’t matter…. No amount of kicking the can down the road will save this country from what’s coming. Quoting: Steve8511 We can tax half the richest people in the US 100% of their money and we’re still screwed. Pretty much, if you add social security, medicare, medicaid and interest on the national debt all current tax receipts are spent. That means the rest of government, salaries, endless wars, pensions, you name it are currently funded via debt. And they keep increasing spending. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 2164937 11/29/2012 12:04 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Simple solution: Financial Transactions Tax. A .001% fee on all stock, commodity, and FX market transactions would bring in over a $Trillion per year. Effect on markets would be negligible, and would reduce computer HFT (high frequency trading) that presently controls and distorts the markets. Since everything is automated, the tax could be automatically deducted and electronically remitted directly to the IRS. Problem solved. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 27211004 11/29/2012 12:10 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Simple solution: Financial Transactions Tax. A .001% fee on all stock, commodity, and FX market transactions would bring in over a $Trillion per year. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2164937 Effect on markets would be negligible, and would reduce computer HFT (high frequency trading) that presently controls and distorts the markets. Since everything is automated, the tax could be automatically deducted and electronically remitted directly to the IRS. Problem solved. Dang, that makes too much sence. Theyll never do it. |
| Carshy McCarsh User ID: 1531528 11/29/2012 12:11 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Boehner on now.....TV basically saying..."dont believe the hype" we have NO cooperation ....lol.. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 19816311 quote...{"we have NO idea what the white house is going to do" anyone seen barry lately after all his pre-election...Im gonna hold hands bullshit That's what the bastard has said every time just before he caves and sells us out to the commies. Tell me what this tastes like... |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 28008747 11/29/2012 12:20 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Simple solution: Financial Transactions Tax. A .001% fee on all stock, commodity, and FX market transactions would bring in over a $Trillion per year. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2164937 Effect on markets would be negligible, and would reduce computer HFT (high frequency trading) that presently controls and distorts the markets. Since everything is automated, the tax could be automatically deducted and electronically remitted directly to the IRS. Problem solved. The amount matters, and if I recall correctly, about 20 years ago James Tobin was recommending a tax level of .01%, so your suggestion is at least milder than that. Still, the effect on markets would not be negligible. For example as you rightly identify, it would drive away high frequency trading. It wouldn't shut it down altogether, some would survive and move to different jurisdictions. It would weaken NYC (and Chicago, Philadelphia, etc.) in its ongoing battle with London and potentially other places (Shanghai?) as the world's main financial city. And to the extent it reduces taxable trading, the tax receipts would be reduced too. Don't calculate that on current trading volumes, since you say, even boast, that those volumes would go way down. The rich people who are successful in financial markets consume a lot of goods and services, many of them domestically. If they move out of country, you may say good riddance but do you mean it? |
| _KiLLuMiNaTi_ (OP) User ID: 24723887 11/29/2012 12:22 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Simple solution: Financial Transactions Tax. A .001% fee on all stock, commodity, and FX market transactions would bring in over a $Trillion per year. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2164937 Effect on markets would be negligible, and would reduce computer HFT (high frequency trading) that presently controls and distorts the markets. Since everything is automated, the tax could be automatically deducted and electronically remitted directly to the IRS. Problem solved. The amount matters, and if I recall correctly, about 20 years ago James Tobin was recommending a tax level of .01%, so your suggestion is at least milder than that. Still, the effect on markets would not be negligible. For example as you rightly identify, it would drive away high frequency trading. It wouldn't shut it down altogether, some would survive and move to different jurisdictions. It would weaken NYC (and Chicago, Philadelphia, etc.) in its ongoing battle with London and potentially other places (Shanghai?) as the world's main financial city. And to the extent it reduces taxable trading, the tax receipts would be reduced too. Don't calculate that on current trading volumes, since you say, even boast, that those volumes would go way down. The rich people who are successful in financial markets consume a lot of goods and services, many of them domestically. If they move out of country, you may say good riddance but do you mean it? What is the definition of "rich people" ? Don't be a sheeple!!!! |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 11333543 11/29/2012 12:22 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Simple solution: Financial Transactions Tax. A .001% fee on all stock, commodity, and FX market transactions would bring in over a $Trillion per year. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2164937 Effect on markets would be negligible, and would reduce computer HFT (high frequency trading) that presently controls and distorts the markets. Since everything is automated, the tax could be automatically deducted and electronically remitted directly to the IRS. Problem solved. i gotta say that is a very clever solution, not only would it tackle deficits but it would also inform traders to think twice before manipulating the market without suffering the consequences |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 961432 11/29/2012 12:26 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The rich people who are successful in financial markets consume a lot of goods and services, many of them domestically. If they move out of country, you may say good riddance but do you mean it? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 28008747 Link? Stats? Data? I seriously doubt that statement. This group of people is so small in comparison to the general population their accumulated spending would amount to nothing in terms of the overall GDP of the country. Why do you think the 3rd world nations are beginning to riot? They spend like 50% of their incomes on items necessary to survive, food, energy, shelter etc. Our money printing causes those prices to increase, so they end up spending more as a percentage for what they need. In comparison, wealth people spend far far less as a percentage of what they have/earn on survival items so inflation doesn't affect them as much, but they need the inflation to maintain their accumulated wealth in the paper assets they hold as "valuable". |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 25342985 11/29/2012 12:29 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Simple solution: Financial Transactions Tax. A .001% fee on all stock, commodity, and FX market transactions would bring in over a $Trillion per year. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2164937 i gotta say that is a very clever solution, not only would it tackle deficits but it would also inform traders to think twice before manipulating the market without suffering the consequences Which is why they won't do it. God forbid that anyone should ever make Wall St. pay anything even approaching their fair share of the taxes in this country. |
| Epic Beard Guy Constitutional Crusader User ID: 26240425 11/29/2012 12:31 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I doubt there is anything they can do to keep the economy from crashing, but I cannot support another bail-out. That is what they are talking about. They will bail out the dfense contractor at the expense of the rest of us. They have to take care of their big campaign contributers. Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. "America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." -- Claire Wolfe |
| Project_Deimos User ID: 1208235 11/29/2012 12:34 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Simple solution: Financial Transactions Tax. A .001% fee on all stock, commodity, and FX market transactions would bring in over a $Trillion per year. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2164937 Effect on markets would be negligible, and would reduce computer HFT (high frequency trading) that presently controls and distorts the markets. Since everything is automated, the tax could be automatically deducted and electronically remitted directly to the IRS. Problem solved. VERY interesting... "There are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say, we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know." |
| cebu4u User ID: 28666623 11/29/2012 12:36 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Simple solution: Financial Transactions Tax. A .001% fee on all stock, commodity, and FX market transactions would bring in over a $Trillion per year. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2164937 Effect on markets would be negligible, and would reduce computer HFT (high frequency trading) that presently controls and distorts the markets. Since everything is automated, the tax could be automatically deducted and electronically remitted directly to the IRS. Problem solved. ^^^^^this |
Desert Fox![]() Forum Moderator User ID: 8786935 11/29/2012 12:52 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The rich people who are successful in financial markets consume a lot of goods and services, many of them domestically. If they move out of country, you may say good riddance but do you mean it? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 28008747 Link? Stats? Data? I seriously doubt that statement. This group of people is so small in comparison to the general population their accumulated spending would amount to nothing in terms of the overall GDP of the country. Why do you think the 3rd world nations are beginning to riot? They spend like 50% of their incomes on items necessary to survive, food, energy, shelter etc. Our money printing causes those prices to increase, so they end up spending more as a percentage for what they need. In comparison, wealth people spend far far less as a percentage of what they have/earn on survival items so inflation doesn't affect them as much, but they need the inflation to maintain their accumulated wealth in the paper assets they hold as "valuable". Oh ye of little knowledge. ![]() |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 20581494 11/29/2012 12:57 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| yankeemofo User ID: 18296310 11/29/2012 01:15 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 17420495 11/29/2012 01:24 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | If we go over the "Fiscal Cliff" both sides win. The R's can claim they didn't raise taxes on their rich base. The D's can claim they raised taxes on the top 2%. Then they'll both agree to lower taxes on the middle-class and everyone making under $500,000 (compromise). Its whats best for the Republicans, Democrates and the Country. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 28008747 11/29/2012 01:33 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Simple solution: Financial Transactions Tax. A .001% fee on all stock, commodity, and FX market transactions would bring in over a $Trillion per year. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2164937 Effect on markets would be negligible, and would reduce computer HFT (high frequency trading) that presently controls and distorts the markets. Since everything is automated, the tax could be automatically deducted and electronically remitted directly to the IRS. Problem solved. The amount matters, and if I recall correctly, about 20 years ago James Tobin was recommending a tax level of .01%, so your suggestion is at least milder than that. Still, the effect on markets would not be negligible. For example as you rightly identify, it would drive away high frequency trading. It wouldn't shut it down altogether, some would survive and move to different jurisdictions. It would weaken NYC (and Chicago, Philadelphia, etc.) in its ongoing battle with London and potentially other places (Shanghai?) as the world's main financial city. And to the extent it reduces taxable trading, the tax receipts would be reduced too. Don't calculate that on current trading volumes, since you say, even boast, that those volumes would go way down. The rich people who are successful in financial markets consume a lot of goods and services, many of them domestically. If they move out of country, you may say good riddance but do you mean it? What is the definition of "rich people" ? Well, "rich people who are successful in financial markets" might be those who make, say, $200,000 per year and up in trading-related activity. These are people who might pick up and move to London, or Singapore, or somewhere else following the trading business. Obviously some are much richer than others. In NYC an income of $200,000 per year is somewhere in the middle class. |
| _KiLLuMiNaTi_ (OP) User ID: 24723887 11/29/2012 01:36 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Simple solution: Financial Transactions Tax. A .001% fee on all stock, commodity, and FX market transactions would bring in over a $Trillion per year. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 2164937 Effect on markets would be negligible, and would reduce computer HFT (high frequency trading) that presently controls and distorts the markets. Since everything is automated, the tax could be automatically deducted and electronically remitted directly to the IRS. Problem solved. The amount matters, and if I recall correctly, about 20 years ago James Tobin was recommending a tax level of .01%, so your suggestion is at least milder than that. Still, the effect on markets would not be negligible. For example as you rightly identify, it would drive away high frequency trading. It wouldn't shut it down altogether, some would survive and move to different jurisdictions. It would weaken NYC (and Chicago, Philadelphia, etc.) in its ongoing battle with London and potentially other places (Shanghai?) as the world's main financial city. And to the extent it reduces taxable trading, the tax receipts would be reduced too. Don't calculate that on current trading volumes, since you say, even boast, that those volumes would go way down. The rich people who are successful in financial markets consume a lot of goods and services, many of them domestically. If they move out of country, you may say good riddance but do you mean it? What is the definition of "rich people" ? Well, "rich people who are successful in financial markets" might be those who make, say, $200,000 per year and up in trading-related activity. These are people who might pick up and move to London, or Singapore, or somewhere else following the trading business. Obviously some are much richer than others. In NYC an income of $200,000 per year is somewhere in the middle class. And I dont think its fair to tax someone earning 250k a year the same as Bill Gates Don't be a sheeple!!!! |
| Carol B. User ID: 21050000 11/29/2012 01:39 PM ![]() Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Ultimately, we will all pay. Quoting: anonanon 4148733 Perhaps it is time to just let it all collapse and then rebuild. We know if we just give those in DC and the White House more money, they will just spend it and waste it on all sorts of things and all sorts of crazy grants and earmarked projects added on to every bill in Congresss. You can bet it will not be just the "rich" who pay for it. It is Obama's disaster now....no more blaming Bush. ^^that^^+1000 |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 28008747 11/29/2012 01:42 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | The rich people who are successful in financial markets consume a lot of goods and services, many of them domestically. If they move out of country, you may say good riddance but do you mean it? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 28008747 Link? Stats? Data? I seriously doubt that statement. This group of people is so small in comparison to the general population their accumulated spending would amount to nothing in terms of the overall GDP of the country. Why do you think the 3rd world nations are beginning to riot? They spend like 50% of their incomes on items necessary to survive, food, energy, shelter etc. Our money printing causes those prices to increase, so they end up spending more as a percentage for what they need. In comparison, wealth people spend far far less as a percentage of what they have/earn on survival items so inflation doesn't affect them as much, but they need the inflation to maintain their accumulated wealth in the paper assets they hold as "valuable". You need a link, stats or data to convince you that rich people who are successful in financial markets consume a lot of goods and services. Sorry I won't bother proving such an obvious statement. The financial industry is still the backbone of the NYC economy. Rich people buy groceries and restaurant meals, yachts and apartments. They buy a black Mercedes or two every few years. They spend a smaller %age of their income on survival gear than poor people, but that's beside the point. A lot of people's jobs depend on non-survival jobs. A lot of people at private boatyards lost their jobs around 2008, as the private yacht business went way down. You're begging the same question I asked. Do you care only about survival spending? Do you want the USA to become a 3rd world country, with less freebies that ordinary folks can glean? Some amount of that would happen if a significant chunk of the financial industry leaves the US jurisdiction. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 28008747 11/29/2012 01:46 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Ultimately, we will all pay. Quoting: anonanon 4148733 Perhaps it is time to just let it all collapse and then rebuild. We know if we just give those in DC and the White House more money, they will just spend it and waste it on all sorts of things and all sorts of crazy grants and earmarked projects added on to every bill in Congresss. You can bet it will not be just the "rich" who pay for it. It is Obama's disaster now....no more blaming Bush. ^^that^^+1000 But he doesn't care. Having had his last election, he has more flexibility. He doesn't need to care what anyone thinks of him, whether it's about lies coming from Susan Rice or any other issue. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 28008747 11/29/2012 01:51 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: Anonymous Coward 28008747 The amount matters, and if I recall correctly, about 20 years ago James Tobin was recommending a tax level of .01%, so your suggestion is at least milder than that. Still, the effect on markets would not be negligible. For example as you rightly identify, it would drive away high frequency trading. It wouldn't shut it down altogether, some would survive and move to different jurisdictions. It would weaken NYC (and Chicago, Philadelphia, etc.) in its ongoing battle with London and potentially other places (Shanghai?) as the world's main financial city. And to the extent it reduces taxable trading, the tax receipts would be reduced too. Don't calculate that on current trading volumes, since you say, even boast, that those volumes would go way down. The rich people who are successful in financial markets consume a lot of goods and services, many of them domestically. If they move out of country, you may say good riddance but do you mean it? What is the definition of "rich people" ? Well, "rich people who are successful in financial markets" might be those who make, say, $200,000 per year and up in trading-related activity. These are people who might pick up and move to London, or Singapore, or somewhere else following the trading business. Obviously some are much richer than others. In NYC an income of $200,000 per year is somewhere in the middle class. And I dont think its fair to tax someone earning 250k a year the same as Bill Gates Well the guys making $5 million might be more likely to leave, since they have more contacts and might be more able to set up elsewhere. The transaction tax would be more fair, but there's another thread today about how so many high earners have left the UK because they could do better under regulatory schemes elsewhere. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 1283316 11/29/2012 02:10 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Isn't there anything the President can do by executive order in times like this? The partisan BS is sickening. Who the hell elected this Grover Norquist guy anyway? Oh, he's not an elected official? Fuck him. Those who signed his idiot pledge should step up and agree that taxes aren't all evil and a few extra grand a year is not even going to put a dent in someone making $150,000 never mind $250,000. |
| _KiLLuMiNaTi_ (OP) User ID: 24723887 11/29/2012 02:18 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Isn't there anything the President can do by executive order in times like this? The partisan BS is sickening. Who the hell elected this Grover Norquist guy anyway? Oh, he's not an elected official? Fuck him. Those who signed his idiot pledge should step up and agree that taxes aren't all evil and a few extra grand a year is not even going to put a dent in someone making $150,000 never mind $250,000. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1283316 its almost like the things our prez does are to intentionally kill our nation *wink wink* Don't be a sheeple!!!! |