« ROUND Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: The bumbling fools in D.C. have done it again. 

By: ribit in ROUND | Recommend this post (1)
Tue, 20 Dec 11 1:59 AM | 44 view(s)
Boardmark this board | De's Test Board
Msg. 37214 of 45651
(This msg. is a reply to 37178 by clo)

Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

clo
...once again, the problem isn't that the gubmint doesn't have enough money. The problem is that they are pissin it away faster than it can be printed.




Avatar

Liberals are like a "Slinky". Totally useless, but somehow ya can't help but smile when you see one tumble down a flight of stairs!




» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: The bumbling fools in D.C. have done it again.
By: clo
in ROUND
Sun, 18 Dec 11 7:44 PM
Msg. 37178 of 45651

A Transaction Fee Might Save Capital Markets... & Protect Us From The Terminator!!

By David Brin, Ph.D.

Here's a vital issue under discussion (at last) on both sides of the Atlantic. Governments, both rich and poor, urgently need two things: a way to calm speculation in the financial markets and also new ways to raise revenue. In late September 2011, the European Commission proposed a tax or fee on financial transactions. This appears to be part of the newly announced European Union plan, with Britain the sole dissenter.

"A levy of just 0.1 percent -- or even just 0.05 percent -- levied on each stock, bond, derivative or currency transaction would be aimed at financial institutions' casino-style trading, which helped precipitate the economic crisis. Because these markets are so vast, the fee could raise hundreds of billions of dollars a year -- from the sector of the economy that made towering profits while being directly responsible for our present depression," writes Philippe Doust-Blazey in the New York Times.

Read the article. But note that it does not mention the top reason for such a tax! That it might benefit real human investors by slowing finance and equity trading back down to the speed of human thought.* 

Would that necessarily be a good thing?

The concocted rationalization you will hear, in opposition to this proposal, is called "market efficiency." According to what's become a bona fide cult, any process or innovation that allows ever-smaller increments of trade to happen ever-faster is "efficiency," and that will automatically lead to better allocation of society's capital, and thus a skyrocketing economy. 

This is wrong in many ways, starting with the pure fact that the flourishing of fast-cybernetic trading has directly correlated with the steepest decline in the health of capital markets in a century. Indeed, the increase in market volatility that we have seen lately, with sudden spikes in apparently random directions, can be generally attributed to this trend.** 

more:
http://www.davidbrin.com/transaction.htm


« ROUND Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next