Jump to content



Photo

Let Wall Street Pay for Wall Street's Bailout Act of 2009 (Introduced in House)


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#11 Kimston

Kimston

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 585 posts

Posted 18 February 2009 - 03:21 PM

I think IT has summed it very well. If this thing passes, my strategy will be to stop trading. Just accumulate 2-yr leap puts during SPY during rallies (if there are any rallies) and hold till expiration. Every two years there would be one transaction tax on the way into the trade and one much larger transaction tax on the way out. Of course if the brokers all go out of business, this will present problems with the plan. Kimston

#12 humble1

humble1

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 5,959 posts

Posted 19 February 2009 - 02:30 AM

not going to happen; worry about something else.

#13 TTHQ Staff

TTHQ Staff

    www.TTHQ.com

  • Admin
  • 8,590 posts

Posted 19 February 2009 - 08:45 AM

not going to happen; worry about something else.



Perhaps, but don't let that stop you from letting your congressman know ASAP what a bunch of &%$@* this is.

Please, be more eloquent than I just was.

#14 humble1

humble1

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 5,959 posts

Posted 19 February 2009 - 10:44 AM

i will do better: all/any/many kinds of junk are introduced in the house, all so the congress person can brag about it in a newsletter. the best thing is to contact rahm emanuel, the CoS of the POTUS. that's where things are decided.

Edited by humble1, 19 February 2009 - 10:45 AM.


#15 IYB

IYB

    Member

  • TT Patron+
  • 7,110 posts

Posted 19 February 2009 - 07:45 PM

>>>This Act may be cited as the `Let Wall Street Pay for Wall Street's Bailout Act of 2009'.<<<
Someone want to explain to me why I (and you) am (are) being asked to pay for TARP? Nobody bailed me out? I haven't seen a dime of TARP funds. Have you???

“Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.” Charles Mackay, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds

#16 zigzag

zigzag

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 1,116 posts

Posted 19 February 2009 - 08:35 PM

A market that perpetually goes up.


This is exactly what they will get After the market hits bottom and there is no where to go But up. :angry:

#17 pdx5

pdx5

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 6,705 posts

Posted 21 February 2009 - 01:08 AM

A transaction tax makes some sense...................if.......................they replace the Capital Gains tax with it. But they won't. It will be another stick added on the camel's back.
"Money cannot consistently be made trading every day or every week during the year." ~ Jesse Livermore Trading Rule

#18 robo

robo

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 635 posts

Posted 21 February 2009 - 11:01 AM

I think the tax will come, but will be scaled down. They could easily get the money from the Broker's. Example - Making a trade at Scottrade might cost 7.50 a trade instead of 7.00. They will start small to get the new bill in the door. Now, I could be wrong - but the opposition will keep this bill small to start and then increase down the road. Same story they did with Cigarettes and alcohol. Most folks will cheer it and Trading is gambling - but pro's have the edge of course. This will not affect investors much, because they make very few moves. My opinion only- but I think it's coming.... I think the amount of folks contacting Congress will be small and many on Main Street will Cheer it. We shall see, but it's my take. They could go right to Rydex and ProShares as an example and add these taxes on the charges and commissions they are already charging us. Then they just send the money to Uncle Ben. These brokerage houses are already set-up to charge us for trades and get their commissions and it will be pretty easy to tack on some more money. You might even see higher charges for short funds and commodity funds will be under even more pressure me thinks. They might just tell main street the money will be used for education. Hmm..... Have you heard that one before. Yep - most of main street will cheer it alright...... I hope I'm wrong, but with Market Value down over 5 Trillion in just the S&P 500 they will make money in both Bear and Bull Markets. Yep- it's coming me thinks.... I'm not saying I agree with this bill - so please don't attack me for my opinion of what I think will happen.... ;) Maybe we will also get a Federal run lotto and they will tell us that it will also be used for education.... Things are going to change folks and I think soon!

Edited by robo, 21 February 2009 - 11:09 AM.


#19 Alton

Alton

    Member

  • TT Member+
  • 208 posts

Posted 21 February 2009 - 06:21 PM

Hi robo,

Let's look at the example you gave as a possible end result of all this.

They could easily get the money from the Broker's. Example - Making a trade at Scottrade might cost 7.50 a trade instead of 7.00.

You said a trader/investor might be charged $7.50 rather and $7.00, and that would allow the broker to pay the tax.

Let's assume that the average transaction there is a round lot of a $40 stock. Under the proposed tax, the take would a quarter of one percent, which is ...hmm.. ($4000 x .01)/4 = $10. So as the bill is currently written, Scottrade would have to charge $17 instead of their current $7. I'm not sure what that would do to their business model, but I don't think it would be pretty. I also think that Rydex and Proshares (mentioned in your post) would not be pleased.

In your example, the sponsers of the bill would have to be willing to accept a tiny fraction of what they originally asked for. Instead of 1/4 of one percent, they would get 1/80 of one percent. I know nothing about our congressmen, but I don't think they'll accept that kind of reduction.

More to the point, why is this tax warranted. Generally speaking, traders didn't cause the financial crisis, so why tax them? And the burden of tax will be skewed to punish those traders with the lowest per-trade profit margin, scalpers and short-term traders who provide liquidity to the market.

I'll not criticize you for posting your opinion, robo, but the danger in your post is that your opinion will lead to complacency. Complacency is dangerous, and I'll be happy to criticize that. This legislation needs quashing.

Alton -- 2/21/09

Edited by Alton, 21 February 2009 - 06:25 PM.


#20 robo

robo

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 635 posts

Posted 21 February 2009 - 09:54 PM

More to the point, why is this tax warranted. Generally speaking, traders didn't cause the financial crisis, so why tax them? And the burden of tax will be skewed to punish those traders with the lowest per-trade profit margin, scalpers and short-term traders who provide liquidity to the market.

Alton -- 2/21/09



Alton,

I agree with you - but my opinion is based on the current attitude on Main Street and the current crew in the White House. I talk with many folks weekly that blame Wall Street and traders for losses in their 401k's. They also blame the Bankers - but plenty of folks now know that Wall Street bundled that crap up and sold it all over the world. Most folks think Wall Street now needs to be punished. The herd wants blood and they are blaming all that are connected to the stock market.

It seems everyone knows what short selling is now. We already have complacency on Main Street and the White House will welcome the tax and income. Ask yourself this – what part of Main Street trades? I think it’s a small percentage. During the crash of 2008 folks had signs on the sidewalks of Wall Street telling traders – brokers - bankers to go ahead and JUMP! Mix in the Madoff story and the other crooks in the news and there will be no concern for traders paying a small tax on trading. The Mob will rule here… They will tell us if you don’t want to pay the tax then don’t trade.

This is only the start of changes that will take place on Wall Street. Main Street wants action and the New Crew in the White House will give it to them in my opinion.

It will all be done in the name of change. Maybe I'm wrong on this, but with the White House printing Trillions and Wall Street a dirty word I stand by opinion that the tax is coming.

Again, it’s my opinion based on the current thinking on Main Street and Trillions of dollars now gone from retirement accounts. When Bill O'reilly has had several segments on it and he comments about how many on Wall Street are just Crooks and Short Sellers and trader is now becoming a dirty word.

We know the real deal, but most folks I talk to think the Casino on Wall Street is a rigged game and I agree with some of that. Little fish swimming with the Sharks will soon have to pay to swim with the sharks. I think the fish will pay up and continue to swim with the sharks - Greed is Good! Yep – the tax is coming me thinks. I’ll be paying if the tax comes – how about you?

I think more rules are coming that traders might not like. Additional crooks will soon be found and I think jail time for some. There are plenty of crooked traders out there spreading rumors on both sides. Bulls and Bears are both trying to get an edge and playing the game. Main Street is ticked off and they really don't care if traders pay to trade. Ask some of the folks coming out of retirement and are going back to work what they think of Wall Street and Traders. Those are the current stories the media is showing on local news channels all over the United States. Not many folks watch CNBC - heck I only watch it with the mute button on. I can’t think of any of my co-workers, friends, or family members who really care if traders are taxed but me.

Take Care and I agree with you, but I still think the tax is coming. It will all be done in the name of change.....

Robo

Edited by robo, 21 February 2009 - 09:58 PM.