Progressive Groups Rally Behind Sanders' Plan to Tax 1% and Fund Higher Ed

[Ichingcarpenter]

Robin Hood tax 'is the hallmark of a civilized society and a more just nation,' says National Nurses United


A broad coalition of nurses, students, religious and civil rights groups, environmentalists, labor and housing advocates on Tuesday praised Sen. Bernie Sanders's (I-Vt.) plan to use a so-called Robin Hood tax on stock transactions to fund tuition at four-year public colleges and universities.


And National People's Action executive director George Goehl added, "Income inequality is now at the center of our national political discourse, with politicians of every stripe recognizing it as a major problem of our time. What too few are willing to say is that we must demand more revenue from corporations and the 1 percent to level the playing field."


http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/05/19/progressive-groups-rally-behind-sanders-plan-tax-1-and-fund-higher-ed

[n2doc]

1. One thing I wish he would emphasize is the effect on high frequency trading

Last edited Wed May 20, 2015, 11:07 AM - Edit history (1)

HFT has made a mockery of the stock market. Sanders' tax would greatly cut down on this.

[sabrina 1]

6. I thought I did hear him mention this in one of his interviews, maybe it was

on Thom Hartmann or perhaps it was his Wolf Blitzer interview. But I agree, he should remember to emphasize that.

[Wilms]

2. ^

[WillyT]

3. K & R !!!

[Cheese Sandwich]

4. Love it!

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/05/19/progressive-groups-rally-behind-sanders-plan-tax-1-and-fund-higher-ed

[hfojvt]

5. so 1/3 of the money needs to come from the states?

Then a lot of states are not going to do it. Some states, thanks to boneheaded Governors and legislatures cannot afford to do it.

My own state, Kansas, is currently trying to figure out how to close an $800 million deficit - created, of course, by Brownback's income tax cuts mostly for rich people, combined with increases in the regressive sales tax.

It is likely that more increases in the sales tax will be used to balance the budget.

Any money the states put into it, will come from regressive taxes.

Since the Robin Hood tax is not detailed here, it is hard to tell what it might cost me. First, indirectly from my retirement plan and second, indirectly from my credit union which also has unspecified investments. Directly, last year I made about 18 transactions worth a total of about $102,300 for a profit of $1,556.12 plus $328 in dividends.

Now I know that makes me a bad liberal. For one thing because I am not supposed to have two nickels to my name, much less $12,000 to "invest" and second because I am supposed to forgo such gambling and keep my money in my credit union where I might earn as much as $140 in interest a year if I put it in 5 year CDs.

[sabrina 1]

7. Why would it have to be a tax? It could come from the Lotto eg.

Where does he say that this would come from anything OTHER than trades by individuals? I keep seeing this talking point but have not found it anywhere in anything Bernie has stated. Sounds like a rumor that was started and then spread around.

Since most Labor Orgs, Unions and Progressive Orgs are with him on this, I doubt they would be if ordinary people were the target of his plan.

He has specifically stated it will come from Wall St.

[hfojvt]

8. most lotto money is already being spent elsewhere

and I don't consider a Lotto to be a particularly progressive way to raise money.

Like I said, there are no details on the Robin Hood tax, at least not in that article. Presumably a transaction tax would be paid by individuals, but also by pension funds, banks and credit unions. Although I cannot be sure if my credit union actually invests in stocks. Their latest financial report lists about $50 million in "investments". Last time I asked, I could not get information on what those investments consisted of. Apparently they got only 0.9% return on their investments, so maybe it's not in the stock market, but they list about $1.3 million in "other income" which could also be gains from their/our investments.

My state pension fund, however, I am pretty sure IS invested in the stock market, and already underfunded - thanks to the legislature.

I am not necessarily against a transaction tax, but I think we need to be honest and clear about it. Some of the tax WILL be paid by pension funds and 401K's and other small investors like me.

[sabrina 1]

9. I saw nothing to give anyone the idea that this tax would be on anyone other than

individuals. It would be against everything he intends to have it be taken from the very people he has always stood up for, and as I said, he is being supported on this proposal by Labor and by Unions etc.

I am of the opinion this rumor is being spread around in order to try to undermine the effort.

[hfojvt]

10. I simply don't see how you have a transaction tax

and then exempt a bunch of organizations. That would be a strange loophole, one that would presumably allow rich people to incorporate their own private holding companies and then use those corporations to invest in stocks.

Even if it is on individuals alone (somehow) then it is still going to come from somebody like me - a card carrying member of the bottom 20% who happens to play the stock market. Fine and dandy, but how much will it cost me? If the rate is even as low as 0.1% then I would pay about $100 on last year's transactions - which is over 6% of my profit on those transactions.

And note, unlike the income tax, I would be paying this transaction tax even if I make no profit. As it turns out, right now I am getting clobbered pretty bad. Right now my break even price is 41.75 and the stock is selling for about 36.5 and I have 300 shares. On paper I am out about $1,500.

So it goes.

To cut my losses, at least a little, I did some flipping. Took a big chance at the high school dance and sold 100 shares at 36.3. Got lucky and it quickly fell to 35.52 where I bought it back, it then went up to 35.9 where I sold it and handily back down to 35.52 where I bought it again. Four transactions, total value of about $14,000, net profit about $80. A 0.1% transaction tax would take about 17.5% of that profit.

Ah well, might discourage me (and others) from playing silly games like that instead of just waiting calmly for the price to rise back to 42 which it hopefully will within a year or two (while also paying over 3.5% in (tax free) dividends). But IF for some reason it doesn't, at least I cut my losses a little.

[sabrina 1]

12. Well from what he says, he is modeling this on what most other European countries are doing.

And his goal is to make the wealthiest pay something back and contribute something to this country.

I doubt he wants people like you to suffer any losses.

Eg, someone explained that the tax on Casino gambling doesn't begin until someone has won a certain amount.

Maybe reading up on how this works in Europe might help get an idea of how it would affect someone like you.

[hfojvt]

13. the search machine only talks about proposals

not actual policies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_financial_transaction_tax

Granted, there is a fair amount that I do not know about banking. "Exchange of shares between financial institutions" so is that investment banks, and insurance companies, but not individuals?

Unfortunately, we almost all seem to be tied, sometimes by force of law, to the damned insurance companies. Increase their costs and they are likely to pass it to us with higher rates.

I am thinking that pretty much the only tax that is guaranteed to NOT hit poor people is - an increase in higher income tax rates. A transaction tax on stocks is likely to be very progressive though since richer people own (and therefore trade) most of the stocks. I am not sure how IRAs and 401Ks figure in that though since there are trillions of dollars in IRAs

[sabrina 1]

14. Well, I'm hoping that this practice of investing people's pensions in risky stocks, seeing how often

over the past number of years, they have lost everything, will be another target for a Sanders' administration. Once they restore regulations on Wall St Banks, this won't happen.

And Bernie is certainly in favor of ending the current system which is nothing but a free for all using the people's money since the deregulation once Clinton signed away Glass Steagal.

Our whole system needs to be reformed and the only way to begin, what will be a long process, is to put people in office who have opposed all of the policies that allowed this to happen, in large numbers. Not just in the WH but in Congrress, in the Senate, at State levels.

And of course to end the influx of Corporate money into our government.

No candidate taking billions in funding from Corporate entities and/or their political pacs can work in the people's best interests.

One major reason I am supporting Sanders because he is refusing that money. If he wins, it will be a huge slap in the face to Citizens United and it will demonstrate that with all their money and conniving to take over our govnernment, the people STILL have the power to overcome those rotten tactics.

[Jefferson23]

11. Thank you. K&R