Who rules America

[ERICOPOLY]

I found this to be an interesting thing -- it actually breaks down the 1% to understand who is in it:

 

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/investment_manager.html

 

 

[Mark Jr.]

Good read. I think I lot of the people demonstrating as "we are the 99%" think that everybody in the 1% owns a couple of private jets and is a 33rd degree freemason.

[Packer16]

Nice perspective.  Maybe wehat we need is a tax on the financial intermediaries to capture a portion of the wealth they siphon off.  That would liven up the debate.

 

Packer

[twacowfca]

I found this to be an interesting thing -- it actually breaks down the 1% to understand who is in it:

 

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/investment_manager.html

 

 

Interesting.  He tells it like it is.  Most of the top 1/100 of 1% are fund manager, investment banker, VC types or the CEO's and other higher ups of their more successful creations. Plus government contractors.  Who of these are parasites and who create wealth and prosperity?

[Packer16]

I think what people have a problem with is some of the IB and IM pay with adding little economic value to the system.  These are some of the highest paid in our society and in general add very little in economic value.  They are rent seekers and charge high fees bacause they can.  If we want less of this activity, we should tax both the activity via a transaction tax and an excess profits tax.  However, if we do this, we may lose this some of this activity and its assocated fees which support real business people.  In any case, this is what the OWS should be pushing for.  Just my 2c.

 

Packer

[onyx1]

I think what people have a problem with is some of the IB and IM pay with adding little economic value to the system.  These are some of the highest paid in our society and in general add very little in economic value.  They are rent seekers and charge high fees bacause they can.  If we want less of this activity, we should tax both the activity via a transaction tax and an excess profits tax.  However, if we do this, we may lose this some of this activity and its assocated fees which support real business people.  In any case, this is what the OWS should be pushing for.  Just my 2c.

 

Packer

 

Packer,

 

Ask and you shall receive!  Adbusters (the group who started OWS) is proposing a 1% tax on all financial transactions to stop the "$1.3 trillion in casino money sloshing around the economy".  Presumably this would apply to ATM transactions as well as all bank deposits, currency transactions, purchases of goods, and any buying or selling of bonds/stocks.  All in the name of social justice!  Aside from ITEX shareholders, how many board members want to get behind this idea?  ::)

 

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2011/10/27/occupy-wall-streets-robin-hood-tax-a-tough-sell-at-g20/

[Packer16]

I think this is a much better way to raise revenue than increasing income taxes.  In addition, it will reduce trading which I think is a good thing.  The only reservation I have is that it must be implemented worldwide with no exceptions.  However, there may be some unintended consequences that I can't think of at the moment which must also be considered.

 

Packer

[meiroy]

 

http://www.robinhoodtax.com/

 

1% is a huge amount, surely they are aiming at a far lower figure?

[SharperDingaan]

Nassim Taleb in his book "Fooled By Randomness", includes a clever exercise on what 'average' means to most people - & why that is so wrong.

 

The gist of the example is that if 9 folks have $100K of wealth each, the average wealth per person of this group is $100K. Add 1 'poor' person with wealth of $1 to the group, & the average wealth per person becomes $90K. 9 of 10 (90%) of the group are ABOVE average, & most everyone feels 'great'.

 

Add 1 'rich' person with wealth of $1000K to the group, & the average wealth per person becomes $190K. 9 of 10 (90%) of the group are BELOW average, & most everyone feels 'ripped'.

 

Perhaps the real reason for the anger of the mob ?

 

SD

 

[Packer16]

This is unbelieveable.  According to this data, if you have a 1% tax it raises about $700b per year.  So we can solve the deficit issue with a 6% tax which will raise about $4 trillion per year.  It sounds to easy - easier than a VAT.  If this even close to be true, either party latches onto this it will have a winning platform.

 

Packer

[Guest]

To get to the top 1% you only need $1.2M or so? That seems a little hard to believe.

[ERICOPOLY]

Michael Moore:

 

"Of course I'm not," Moore said when prodded by Morgan. "How can I be in the 1 percent?"

 

http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Michael-Moore-I-am-the-1-Percent-132799998.html

[ERICOPOLY]

I think what people have a problem with is some of the IB and IM pay with adding little economic value to the system.  These are some of the highest paid in our society and in general add very little in economic value.  They are rent seekers and charge high fees bacause they can.  If we want less of this activity, we should tax both the activity via a transaction tax and an excess profits tax.  However, if we do this, we may lose this some of this activity and its assocated fees which support real business people.  In any case, this is what the OWS should be pushing for.  Just my 2c.

 

Packer

 

Packer,

 

Ask and you shall receive!  Adbusters (the group who started OWS) is proposing a 1% tax on all financial transactions to stop the "$1.3 trillion in casino money sloshing around the economy".  Presumably this would apply to ATM transactions as well as all bank deposits, currency transactions, purchases of goods, and any buying or selling of bonds/stocks.  All in the name of social justice!  Aside from ITEX shareholders, how many board members want to get behind this idea?  ::)

 

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2011/10/27/occupy-wall-streets-robin-hood-tax-a-tough-sell-at-g20/

 

 

Righhhtt.....

 

How is that going to do anything but encourage the use of options.

 

What's a 1% tax on common stock going to cost me vs a 1% tax on the option?

 

 

 

[onyx1]

I think what people have a problem with is some of the IB and IM pay with adding little economic value to the system.  These are some of the highest paid in our society and in general add very little in economic value.  They are rent seekers and charge high fees bacause they can.  If we want less of this activity, we should tax both the activity via a transaction tax and an excess profits tax.  However, if we do this, we may lose this some of this activity and its assocated fees which support real business people.  In any case, this is what the OWS should be pushing for.  Just my 2c.

 

Packer

 

Packer,

 

Ask and you shall receive!  Adbusters (the group who started OWS) is proposing a 1% tax on all financial transactions to stop the "$1.3 trillion in casino money sloshing around the economy".  Presumably this would apply to ATM transactions as well as all bank deposits, currency transactions, purchases of goods, and any buying or selling of bonds/stocks.  All in the name of social justice!  Aside from ITEX shareholders, how many board members want to get behind this idea?  ::)

 

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2011/10/27/occupy-wall-streets-robin-hood-tax-a-tough-sell-at-g20/

 

 

Righhhtt.....

 

How is that going to do anything but encourage the use of options.

 

What's a 1% tax on common stock going to cost me vs a 1% tax on the option?

 

Stock brokers figured that out a long time ago, by charging you not on dollars but on the value of the underlying shares.  I expect that the taxers would want the same.

[twacowfca]

This is unbelieveable.  According to this data, if you have a 1% tax it raises about $700b per year.  So we can solve the deficit issue with a 6% tax which will raise about $4 trillion per year.  It sounds to easy - easier than a VAT.  If this even close to be true, either party latches onto this it will have a winning platform.

 

Packer

 

The revenue projection is a mirage.  The imposition of such a tax would likely reduce the number of transactions subject to the tax to a very low number, perhaps .1 to .01 of the current number of transactions.  The greatest burden would fall on the less sophisticated, those who use ATMs and money orders who probably would reduce their necessary transactions very little!

[given2invest]

This is unbelieveable.  According to this data, if you have a 1% tax it raises about $700b per year.  So we can solve the deficit issue with a 6% tax which will raise about $4 trillion per year.  It sounds to easy - easier than a VAT.  If this even close to be true, either party latches onto this it will have a winning platform.

 

Packer

 

You're kidding right?

[ERICOPOLY]

By definition, aren't hedge fund managers just siphoning money from other parts of the 1%?  I mean, in order to legally invest in a hedge fund your assets and income need to be in the 1% category.

 

So how can they be responsible for hurting any part of the 99%?

 

It's just rearranging the deck chairs.

[given2invest]

By definition, aren't hedge fund managers just siphoning money from other parts of the 1%?  I mean, in order to legally invest in a hedge fund your assets and income need to be in the 1% category.

 

So how can they be responsible for hurting any part of the 99%?

 

It's just rearranging the deck chairs.

 

Lots of hedge funds invest pension money and endowment money. 

[ERICOPOLY]

By definition, aren't hedge fund managers just siphoning money from other parts of the 1%?  I mean, in order to legally invest in a hedge fund your assets and income need to be in the 1% category.

 

So how can they be responsible for hurting any part of the 99%?

 

It's just rearranging the deck chairs.

 

Lots of hedge funds invest pension money and endowment money.

 

Okay, you are right about that.

 

However I wonder what the breakdown is for the hedge fund industry. 

 

For example:

How much of hedge fund profits (what % of fee profit) comes off the assets held by the bottom 50%?  I think the bottom 50% only have $1.5 trillion in combined net worth (at least according to The Daily Show).

 

I have a strong suspicion that for the most part the hedge funds are profiting off of the wealthy. 

 

 

[Green King]

This shows the extreme income inequality in american its not the top 1% but more like the 1/1000 the of one percent that control most of  the wealth n power.  (due to our tax structure and  basic structure of our brand of capitalism.)

 

Hey WM and IB  serve a role allocation of capital which is the key for a capitalist society. The problems are the gambling, the bad incentive structure, idea of there is a short cut in life etc. (without good capital allocation we would have something like China where each official build for their own gain and not for long term gain and where all the loss )distributed to the people of China and the system as an whole.)

 

WM and IB should be paid based on their long term performance where they get paid enough to live on and the rest would come for long term gain. In terms of 10, 20, 30 years, American business has become to short sighted.

[Hawk4value]

...Europe is asking it to join them in imposing a tax on what is mainly investor speculation...

 

I agree conceptually with some form of transaction tax, and also any tax which will disincentivize speculative, casino like behavior.  Also hedge fund, or asset mgrs, etc., who make a living managing money need to pay income tax on their earnings not a capital gains tax. This is the biggest rip off of all.

[given2invest]

...Europe is asking it to join them in imposing a tax on what is mainly investor speculation...

 

Also hedge fund, or asset mgrs, etc., who make a living managing money need to pay income tax on their earnings not a capital gains tax. This is the biggest rip off of all.

 

99.99% of the population agrees with you on this one.  Shit, I was a hedge fund manager and I agree with you (as does all the managers I know).  But that .01% is very powerful.

[HJ]

There's a lot to be said for the transaction tax.  To start, it certainly would force every transaction to be more long term oriented if it's no longer frictionless.  It'd kill something like high frequency trading, but I'm not sure if it's such a bad thing.  It would also force some longer term thinking into entering into any financial transaction, be it taking out a loan or entering into a derivative.  But seems like 1% up front shouldn't kill any transaction that provide true economic value for the society.  It would kill some part of the financial industry as it is currently constructed, but after the initial shock, the world will moves on.  The problem would be if it forces too many financial transactions underground into something that's non transparent for all to see.  But somewhere between fraction of a cent per share, or half a tick per bond, and 1% of notional is a number that makes sense for the society?

 

 

[hyten1]

parker how can that be 1% is 700b? the entire US gdp is about 17 trillion per yr

[AZ_Value]

...Europe is asking it to join them in imposing a tax on what is mainly investor speculation...

 

Also hedge fund, or asset mgrs, etc., who make a living managing money need to pay income tax on their earnings not a capital gains tax. This is the biggest rip off of all.

 

99.99% of the population agrees with you on this one.  Shit, I was a hedge fund manager and I agree with you (as does all the managers I know).  But that .01% is very powerful.

 

Personally I cannot understand why this carried interest thing doesn't get changed first thing Monday morning when Congress opens for business. This is one of the things that make me give up hope on Washington. The entire country can agree on the foolishness of it and yet we can't even get that done.