Yet another lesson in how to take a perfect, populist issue that will fill the federal coffers, has virtually no adverse impact on the little guy, will raise money from Wall Street banksters ... and blow it:
House Democrats who are opposed to a new tax on stock transactions are rounding up their colleagues to oppose the measure, and say they have at least 20 Democratic and Republican supporters.
Rep. Mike McMahon (D-N.Y.) is circulating a letter against the tax idea that Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) and Ed Perlmutter (D-Colo.) are backing to raise $150 billion each year.....
"It’s just the wrong idea at the wrong time," he said. While McMahon represents a district with a lot of voters who work on Wall Street and elsewhere in New York finance, he is making his case to Democrats from around the country that the measure would hurt their constituents and their local finances.
"They certainly represent municipalities and states that have to pay more for bond transactions," McMahon said. "They represent senior citizens whose savings would be affected by this. They represent middle-class people."
First off, this is a quarter of a percent tax on stock transactions. Hard to see how this is going to have an impact on your average middle-class person. Second, how exactly is this going to harm the finances of your average senior citizen?
The tax would be refunded for tax-favored retirement accounts, mutual funds, education savings accounts, health savings accounts, and the first $100,000 of transactions annually that are not already exempted.
Please, buy a freakin' clue from Tom Harkin, who's introducing an identical bill in the Senate:
"Until 1966, the United States taxed all stock transactions and transfers," Harkin said during a conference call with reporters on Friday. "Indeed, Congress doubled the transaction tax rate during the Great Depression in order to finance economic recovery initiatives."
Harkin's bill would place a 0.25 percent tax on each stock transaction and a 0.02 percent tax on options, futures and swaps, but it would exempt tax-benefited accounts like retirement plans.
Harkin said there's "nothing novel or untested" about such a proposal, as Great Britain levies a tax on such transactions.
He said the legislation is not about retribution to the bailed out banks.
"Let me put it bluntly, we need this revenue, which would amount to as much as $100 billion or more annually," Harkin said. "We need it to reduce the deficit as well as to pay for new legislation to create jobs and put people back to work."
This is a no-brainer, a gimme. Here's the very simple framing that should be used, rinsed and repeated a minimum of ten times daily:
Main Street bailed out Wall Street so it's time for Wall Street to return the favor.