The Other Shoe Dropping?: Sanders (should be) Suing DNC

Here we go:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ith-plan-to-make-wall-street-pay-for-college/

 

Why would you tax deriviates at 1/100 of the percentage of stocks? Doesn't that defeat the purpose?

 

Ok reread the original thread. I was thinking 1 percent because i was counting both sides of the transaction. Still is utterly idiotic. And why not tax deriviates more since they are used far more for speculation than individual stocks.

 

Can't we just have a flat tax? I'm tired of all these 1%er trades.

 

This article freely admits that it will greatly reduce trading yet justifies it by saying the traders will be better served in other jobs, yet also says it will raise a lot of money. How is it going to raise money if the trades go away?

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/bernie-sanders-takes-it-t_b_7438808.html

Btw the argument that this won't get passed on to the consumer in this article is flat out ridiculous. It's the proprietary trading that will go to zero. Mutual fund manager trading won't drop much at all. In other words Wall Street will pay almost zero (because those trades are now unprofitable) and Main Street will pay the brunt (because those trades have to be made anyway).

 

Exactly. Once a populace can vote its own payments, it's exactly theft.

Sanders loudly proclaiming raising taxes is great with the transparency, but the spend is idiotic.