HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Robert Reich: Why Is Ever...

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:40 PM

Robert Reich: Why Is Everyone Ignoring One of Sanders' Most Important Proposals?

http://www.alternet.org/economy/robert-reich-why-everyone-ignoring-one-sanders-most-important-proposals

Bernie's idea to tax financial speculation is right on the money, and not even radical. What gives?


Why is there so little discussion about one of Bernie Sanders’s most important proposals – to tax financial speculation?

Buying and selling stocks and bonds in order to beat others who are buying and selling stocks and bonds is a giant zero-sum game that wastes countless resources, uses up the talents of some of the nation’s best and brightest, and subjects financial market to unnecessary risk.

High-speed traders who employ advanced technologies in order to get information a millisecond before other traders get it don’t make financial markets more efficient. They make them more vulnerable to debacles like the “Flash Crash” of May 2010.

Wall Street Insiders who trade on confidential information unavailable to small investors don’t improve the productivity of financial markets. They just rig the game for themselves.

Bankers who trade in ever more complex derivatives – making bets on bets – don’t add real value. They only make the system more vulnerable to big losses, as occurred in the financial crisis of 2008.

(snip)
So why is it only Bernie Sanders who’s calling for a financial transactions tax?

(snip)
So why is it only Bernie Sanders who’s calling for a financial transactions tax? Why aren’t politicians of all stripes supporting it? And why isn’t it a major issue in the 2016 election?

Because a financial transactions tax directly threatens a major source of Wall Street’s revenue. And, if you hadn’t noticed, the Street uses a portion of its vast revenues to gain political clout.

56 replies, 1727 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 56 replies Author Time Post
Reply Robert Reich: Why Is Everyone Ignoring One of Sanders' Most Important Proposals? (Original post)
Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 OP
Human101948 Apr 2016 #1
Sheepshank Apr 2016 #8
Baobab Apr 2016 #21
Sheepshank Apr 2016 #25
Baobab Apr 2016 #26
Sheepshank Apr 2016 #29
cui bono Apr 2016 #42
JudyM Apr 2016 #2
CrowCityDem Apr 2016 #3
elleng Apr 2016 #7
CrowCityDem Apr 2016 #20
elleng Apr 2016 #24
Armstead Apr 2016 #31
Meteor Man Apr 2016 #38
Human101948 Apr 2016 #40
cui bono Apr 2016 #44
CTyankee Apr 2016 #4
elleng Apr 2016 #9
CTyankee Apr 2016 #12
elleng Apr 2016 #16
CTyankee Apr 2016 #27
elleng Apr 2016 #32
Armstead Apr 2016 #33
elleng Apr 2016 #36
Armstead Apr 2016 #39
cui bono Apr 2016 #46
Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #48
TheDormouse Apr 2016 #5
Sheepshank Apr 2016 #6
Stevepol Apr 2016 #30
elleng Apr 2016 #34
Armstead Apr 2016 #35
Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #49
Hoyt Apr 2016 #10
hollysmom Apr 2016 #15
Hoyt Apr 2016 #51
DebDoo Apr 2016 #11
elleng Apr 2016 #14
DebDoo Apr 2016 #18
elleng Apr 2016 #23
hollysmom Apr 2016 #13
Dragonfli Apr 2016 #17
Uncle Joe Apr 2016 #19
Rebkeh Apr 2016 #22
Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #50
Fresh_Start Apr 2016 #28
imagine2015 Apr 2016 #37
Meteor Man Apr 2016 #41
anigbrowl Apr 2016 #43
B Calm Apr 2016 #45
nationalize the fed Apr 2016 #47
rurallib Apr 2016 #52
EndElectoral Apr 2016 #53
Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #55
astrophuss42 Apr 2016 #54
Octafish Apr 2016 #56

Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:44 PM

1. Because there is no one out there pushing it...

 

All the other candidates are Wall Street lap dogs and corporate whores.

It ain't gonna happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Human101948 (Reply #1)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:56 PM

8. BS & Jane have had a lot of air time to press the issue...

 

....they let it fall by the wayside for good reason.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1779210

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #8)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:18 PM

21. Bernie has propoed a financial trasactios tax, I am pretty sure.

I will have to go back through my notes which are on my other computer. But I think he has proposed a small financial transactions tax.

Taxes are among the only kinds of regulation permitted by trade deals on banks so it would make sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baobab (Reply #21)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:22 PM

25. I don't doubt he's made a proposal, but the OP is wondering why it isn't bigger news

 

I'm saying it's up to Bernie to press an agenda item, and he and Jane have had lots of opportunities to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #25)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:25 PM

26. Jane isn't running for President

And it is my impression that a financial transactions tax has been part of his platform all along.

I don't understand what you are getting at here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baobab (Reply #26)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:40 PM

29. She is a spokes person, intimately and aggressively involved with the campaign....

 

...and has made several high profile appearances on MSM outlets. She has promoted Bernie and his agenda...just refuses to talk about this particular item raised in the OP. We should be wondering why the Sanders' are not promoting their own agenda items instead of the OP blaming others for the lack of information and promotion of their tax schemes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Baobab (Reply #26)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:03 PM

42. All you have to do is read their sig line to know they are not the least bit interested

in honest discussion.

I gave that person a link to the Vermont SOS website explaining how people don't register to a party there and they still kept trying to smear Bernie as "not a Democrat". At least they finally took that off their sig line.

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:46 PM

2. Because it's not about "what's best" for the country, it's about what serves me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:49 PM

3. Careful what you want. That tax would hit average people's investments too.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrowCityDem (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:56 PM

7. I guess that answers it,

if it feels uncomfortable for you, don't think about it. Just the right way to make public policy, I guess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #7)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:18 PM

20. It's not a "Wall Street" tax, and it will affect plenty of middle class people. That's big.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrowCityDem (Reply #20)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:21 PM

24. Yes, and I'm one of the people it would affect.

Big change is big.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrowCityDem (Reply #20)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:44 PM

31. Yes we Republicans hate taxes...don't like those public services either

 

and just remember, support the rich because one day you too may be rich

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrowCityDem (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:53 PM

38. A Pittance

for average investors. The usual suggested transaction tax is 1% or .7%. It would primarily affect high volume traders who game the system with computer generated program trading.

Not a significant tax for average investors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrowCityDem (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:00 PM

40. How often do you trade?

 

I personally made two trades last.

Under a bill Mr. Sanders introduced last May, investors would be required to pay an excise tax on any transfer of a stock, bond, partnership interest or derivative. Stock trades would incur a 0.5% tax rate, or $5 for every $1000 of stocks traded. Bond trading gets a 0.10% tax rate. Derivatives a 0.005% tax rate.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/what-would-bernie-sanders-wall-st-tax-look-like-2016-02-14


If you are doing high frequency trading that is not "investment." Those are the people that would really be affected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrowCityDem (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:06 PM

44. Hardly. The tax is meant to hit the heavy traders and the brokerages who have a fast track

and use computers to make trades in nanoseconds. Fast and furious mega-trading. That's who's going to get the tax burden from this.

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:50 PM

4. because the press doesn't really care to report it and here at DU some Hillary

supporters want to ignore it and paint Bernie as an insufferable purist. It's actually kinda funny...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:58 PM

9. Wish I could call it funny, yank,

but people's refusal to bother to think and do the right thing is really bugging me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #9)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:05 PM

12. I think the hissy fit is due to the Pope. How dare he talk to Bernie?

Some people just can't get over it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:13 PM

16. I wish it were that simple, yank,

but there appears to be actual hatred around here for Senator Sanders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #16)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:34 PM

27. I know. There are some bitter people who see him getting in the way of her coronation.

My own husband and two of my dearest friends are voting for Hillary and nobody's mad at anyone else. Husband wants HRC because he says it's time for a woman to be president and I can't fault him for saying that. My two friends are good buddies from way back and we respect differences. So it does NOT have to be acrimonious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #27)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:45 PM

32. Right, it doesn't;

spoke with my landlord/neighbor Sunday, first time to discuss politics, and we're pretty close, value-wise, I think, our differences were no big deal.

His family is from NH, and his wife went up there to help for the primary for hrc. They're very 'environmental.' So after our chat, we agreed I'd 'friend' him on fb so he can see my pics; it's his property, after all! And yesterday he brought me asparagus from their garden.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #16)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:46 PM

33. "appears to be"....?

 

It's much easier to hate Sanders than to actually think about what he -- and the movement he represents -- is actually saying and the implications.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #33)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:50 PM

36. Gee, Armstead,

you may be right, but 'hate' is not easy for me. (I HATE cheney; can't think of any other contemporary I actually hate.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #36)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:56 PM

39. I hate the word hate.....Especially last few years

 

It's tossed around so commonly. Should be saved for special cases...like Cheney.

I especially dislike it in the political context, as a word to substitute for "critical of"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #4)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:07 PM

46. Hillary supporters are spouting Republican talking points against taxes,

single-payer health care, voter suppression and election fraud. And they want Bernie supporters to take a loyalty oath???



.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #46)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:07 PM

48. Exactly,

and what does that tell you about them........?

DLC Third Way, DINOS, disenfranchised republicans in control of our party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:52 PM

5. because someone else prefers tax breaks for corporations

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:55 PM

6. Why isn't Bernie pushing it?

 

I think it's in part because he's tying it to financing his super expensive pet projects and economist agree, it doesn't all add up. Hence, he's really not wanting to bring much attention to it except for perhaps a general passing mention, but no details...and it's all for a good reason, it does't pass his false optics messaging.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #6)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:41 PM

30. Where do you get this idea?

"Economists agree it doesn't add up"?? When you say "economists," do you mean ALL "economists"? What about the 170 economists who say that Bernie's policies, including the transactions tax (which BTW most other major industrialized countries have and which the US used to have) would be excellent to stimulate and improve the economy? That group of economists includes many of the most eminent and respected economists in the country.

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/01/14/170-economists-bernie-sanders-plan-reform-wall-st-rein-greed.html

http://usuncut.com/politics/170-top-economists-back-bernie-sanders-plan-to-rein-in-wall-street/

http://www.ooyuz.com/geturl?aid=9959466

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/paul_krugman_says_the_170_policy_experts_who_support_sanders_wall_street_re

This final source includes the list of the 170 economists and their pedigrees. Included are Robert Reich of UC Berkeley, James Galbraith of Texas University, and William Black of the University of Missouri-Kansas City

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stevepol (Reply #30)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:46 PM

34. Thanks, Stevepol.

You've provided the resources I didn't have available.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stevepol (Reply #30)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:47 PM

35. Definition of an economist -- Someone who supports Clinton

 

All others are pretenders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stevepol (Reply #30)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:09 PM

49. Willful ignorance is bliss

Status quo is less scary

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:00 PM

10. I think this tax -- which generally I support -- is not just on speculation. It would be on

transactions by anyone in market, like union retirement plans, 401Ks held by lots of workers making less than $50,000, etc. It's not a lot of money, and is relatively painless -- but let's characterize it for what it is. I do not think Clinton is opposed to that idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #10)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:12 PM

15. really, you think she is not opposed, I suggest someone ask her.

dollars to donuts she is opposed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hollysmom (Reply #15)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:29 PM

51. Depends on what you mean by "opposed." :) There are a lot of ways to increase taxes on wealthy

people, this being one of them. I doubt she'd say, yes I will add this tax at this point. I bet she would say that she will have a comprehensive plan to increase taxes, this being one possibility. When she comes up with that plan, she'll consider what stands a chance of passing the Congress we are dealt. For instance, we could just as well impose a wealth tax, increase capital gains taxes, increase taxes on expensive homes, and many more.

The fact is, recently she stated that she did not think the government should give money to wealth parents for their kids' college education. To me, that is a backdoor tax that saves our tax money for other important things.

To many here it was just another way to slam Clinton that made no sense -- "she wants to make wealthy people pay their kids' college." So, what the crud is wrong with that if it helps poorer kids' get needed tuition money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:02 PM

11. I think it's because everyone's focusing on the "free stuff" he's going to use it for




He has mentioned it. A lot. But unfortunately no can get past the idea that he wants to give out "free stuff".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DebDoo (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:10 PM

14. It's astonishing to me how simple-minded people are,

latch onto a false 'meme,' stay in their comfort zones, and nothing EVER improves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #14)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:15 PM

18. I might be able to understand it...if their confort zone was actually comfortable

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DebDoo (Reply #18)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:19 PM

23. Yes, of course, but it appears to be comfortable to not change anything,

that's the zone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:10 PM

13. decades ago I hada friend who clued me into the faster access that some people got and most of us d

stocks are very rigged

but aside form that day trading is killing us. capital gains should be taxed higher than regular income. Another of my biggies.

And from when I was at Mellon - upper management that manipulates stock price by the timing of their news releases to the date they could cash in stock options.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:13 PM

17. K&R for needed exposure /nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:15 PM

19. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Ferd Berfel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:19 PM

22. the definition of insanity

but then, it's not insane to you if it works for you.

if a broken system is not broken for you, well then of course it's not broken.

what's lacking here are empathy and solidarity with the poor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rebkeh (Reply #22)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:11 PM

50. ....and the middle-class

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:35 PM

28. Not only Bernie is calling for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:51 PM

37. K & R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:00 PM

41. National Nurses United

is abig supporter of a transaction tax. It would have a minimal effect on working Americans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:03 PM

43. Because securities law is boring to most people

 

I'm OK with the idea but most people just don't know enough about the investment industry to assess the likely impact of the tax. It's easier to talk about changing healthcare or education costs because those are the sorts of expenses many people have experience dealing with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:06 PM

45. It would be a lot less turmoil in the market.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 08:16 PM

47. k&r

"It’s hardly a radical idea.

Between 1914 and 1966, the United States itself taxed financial transactions. During the Great Depression, John Maynard Keynes urged wider use of such a tax to reduce excessive speculation by financial traders. After the Wall Street crash of October 1987, even the first President George Bush endorsed the idea."

^

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:31 PM

52. because corporate media

do I need to spell it out?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:33 PM

53. Pragmatists say "No, you can't do that."

Bad for business.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EndElectoral (Reply #53)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:42 PM

55. yep

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:41 PM

54. It's gonna be a bad bad time

When this ball of wax finally melts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ferd Berfel (Original post)

Thu Apr 21, 2016, 03:50 PM

56. In my greedy mind: Oooh! Oooh! My poor 401(k)!

Which is long turned to mincemeat as you read this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread