Las Vegas News, Sports, Business, Entertainment and Classifieds

Las Vegas Review-Journal - Opinion

Thursday
Sep 9, 2010
Partly Cloudy
Partly Cloudy 76° Weather Forecast

RECENT EDITIONS
Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu

sponsored by
Opinion


EDITORIAL: Tax, tax, tax some more

The worst of the recession appears to be over. Stock markets are regaining the faith of investors. The climate for companies seeking to raise capital is warming up, kindling hopes that new jobs are on the horizon.

But Democrats aren't inclined to wait for the free-market economy to get back into gear -- there's an election next year, after all. So if Wall Street is even part-way back on its feet, naturally, it's time to tax the heck of out it.


Most Popular Stories
  1. Matter of principle
  2. Not cheap
  3. Don't blame rising political anger on race



Reps. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., and Ed Perlmutter, D-Colo., are drafting a bill that would slap a 0.25 percent tax on the sale and purchase of financial instruments such as stocks and securities. They estimate it would add about $150 billion a year to the Treasury. They call this crazy idea the "Let Wall Street Pay for the Restoration of Main Street Act of 2009."

In the Democrats' world, Wall Street financiers exist in a bubble, where their considerable assets never escape to circulate in the broader economy. In reality, Wall Street props up Main Street every day by allowing investors to back promising ventures and well-run companies -- voluntarily.

Reps. DeFazio and Perlmutter want to seize enough cash each year to build 17 CityCenters, or fund California's insolvent government for 12 months. They'd put half their annual take in a "Job Creation Reserve" -- never mind what happens to those artificial, "targeted" jobs when taxpayer subsidies go away -- and apply the other half toward reducing the federal budget deficit. At Washington's current rate, $75 billion would cover less than two weeks of deficit spending.

Congress should be encouraging investment in the United States, not scaring it away. A new tax on stock trades would make American opportunities less attractive in the global marketplace and make it far more expensive for fund managers to get returns for their shareholders.

At a time when there's no shortage of bad ideas in Washington, this one ranks among the worst. The notion that debt-addicted congressmen can create as many sustainable jobs in as short a time as the private sector is laughable.

Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

Comments (32)

Share your thoughts on this story.

Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.

Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.

X

Register to comment

* Indicates fields that are required
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Male Female

Already registered? Log in now

X

Already registered to comment?

Log in below
E-mail
Password

Forgot your password? | Register
X

Forgot your password?

Enter your e-mail address below and a password will be resent to you.

Email
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.

Report abuse

Rob L. wrote on November 27, 2009 06:02 PM: Who is saying "Were broke, stop spending?" There isn't a single person with any power making that call and actually living by it. The extremists 5% at the ends of the spectrum own both parties and the 90% in the middle are left holding the bill.

Complaining about the OTHER party while re-electing a t*rd is akin to shaking your muggers hand while punching an innocent bystander. As long as we are too stupid to actually hold those we VOTE FOR to the standard they campaigned on, this country will continue to be pillaged by the scum that occupies Capitol Hill.


Report abuse

Winston.Smith wrote on November 27, 2009 04:54 PM: At this point, anyone that believes we can restore fiscal sanity by replacing Socialist Party A with Socialist Party B is deeply deluded. The warfare/welfare state that has become entrenched over the last 5 decades requires constant feeding and burping.

As we saw in 1994 with Gingrich's "Republican Revolution", the temporary sanity only lasts long enough to change the D's to R's on the Congressional office doors. Why? Because both party leaderships have long been owned by the fascist/globalist banksters that created and still control the federal reserve.


Report abuse

SO? wrote on November 27, 2009 03:35 PM: Didn't these clowns take ANY economics classes? Don't the people (well, sheeple) realize that everyone's retirement accounts, even the state owned ones, are reliant upon securities and the stock market for the necessary returns, so that we can all retire? The unions, CALPERS, and all of them need 8-9% projected returns so we can RETIRE. How much more legalized theft can we take in this country???


Report abuse

TheShadow wrote on November 27, 2009 03:09 PM: Oh Rake, I'll bet it really isn't my nose that you want me to blow it out of.

We are in a real fix. The Republicans spend like drunken sailors (my apologies to drunken sailors everywhere) while promising to shrink government and the Democrats spend like drunken sailors (IBID) buying votes. The only difference between them is what they blow our dough on.

While these childish games are going on nobody is worrying about what we are going to do to compete with the new Asian economic powers. We just keep losing jobs and our standard of living keeps going down as it has for the past 10 years.

Our best hope is that 2010 will change the leadership in at least one branch of Congress so these fools can gridlock each other. It's sad to say, but in the absence of any one governing who has a clue, gridlock is our least destructive alternative.


Report abuse

Gerald wrote on November 27, 2009 02:48 PM: ..and yet Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma was part of the majority control of congress that borrowed some $8,000,000,000,000 2001-2007.

Coburn was for the Medicare Drug program which cost the same as the proposed health care overhaul: one was okay and the other will bankrupt us? Sounds like Glen Beck thinking to me, though to be fair, Beck has no answers for the coming fiscal 'asteroid' either, aside from "sacrificing" with an "immediate 122% increase in Medicare taxes and a 26% increase in Social Security taxes can prevent (or more likely, delay) its impact."

I don't know how to reconcile the two Tom Coburns.

It seems that Republicans can borrow and spend but Democrats cannot? I only ask because some writers here propose putting into power in 2010 the same idiots that gave us the financial meltdown we have today. Insanity = doing the same thing over and over hoping for a different outcome.

We were broke in 2012.

Don't re-elect a single one of them!


Report abuse

gerald wrote on November 27, 2009 02:48 PM: I am wrong!

Coburn didn't enter the Senate until 2005 and he thought the Medicare D legislation, at a cost of $1.2 trillion through 2014 and "Medicare’s total unfunded liability through 2078 is $29.7 trillion, of which Part D accounts for $8.7 trillion" and that "The new drug benefit should be revisited and repealed...Any drug benefit considered in the future should be means-tested, not universal."

My apologies for characterizing Coburn's position on Medicare D...not for the insane spending of Republicans form 1994-2007.


Report abuse

Athos wrote on November 27, 2009 02:46 PM: Gerald, I agree 100% with a total overhaul of our elected wastrels. However, you know as well as I that almost all areas of our country have the belief that congress stinks, except for their guy (how can Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Charlie Rangel continue to get re elected? Not to be totally partisan, Snow, Lindsey Graham, Arlin Spector are a few more to throw in) but I digress.

What part of "we're broke, stop spending" don't these people get? Or is it the moochers that have won the day, and demand more money from the workers?


Report abuse

Gerald wrote on November 27, 2009 02:25 PM: ..and yet Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma was part of the majority control of congress that borrowed some $8,000,000,000,000 2001-2007.

Coburn was for the Medicare Drug program which cost the same as the proposed health care overhaul: one was okay and the other will bankrupt us? Sounds like Glen Beck thinking to me, though to be fair, Beck has no answers for the coming fiscal 'asteroid' either, aside from "sacrificing" with an "immediate 122% increase in Medicare taxes and a 26% increase in Social Security taxes can prevent (or more likely, delay) its impact."

I don't know how to reconcile the two Tom Coburns.

It seems that Republicans can borrow and spend but Democrats cannot? I only ask because some writers here propose putting into power in 2010 the same idiots that gave us the financial meltdown we have today. Insanity = doing the same thing over and over hoping for a different outcome.

We were broke in 2012.

Don't re-elect a single one of them!


Report abuse

Athos wrote on November 27, 2009 01:59 PM: There is a big fight coming between the government and the governed. Dr. Utopia wants big brother government dishing out the goodies like Mom cutting up the pumpkin pie. Here's something I copied from another source, that agrees with my thoughts on Health Care bill and Cap and trade and every other Dr. Utopia proposed government fix:

"For me, the real bottom line here is just a question of what we can afford and honesty. We know these programs won't save money. They will add to our tax and debt burden. Tom Coburn pointed out that there are huge ethical problems with stealing money from our unborn children (he's delivered over 4,000 babies).

Let's be real. We're broke.

Spending this money is theft by fraud at worst, by ignorance at best. I am looking forward to a rout in 2010."

When you are in charge of spending OPM (other people's money); there should be a reckoning.

Hopefully 2010 is that day. To be followed by 2012. And don't misunderstand me, we need ALL the stables cleaned out, not just the ones marked D.


Report abuse

tucanofulano wrote on November 27, 2009 12:47 PM: These idiots overlook the fact Wall St. $'s, Main St. $'s, "Elm St." $'s are all $'s that belong to individuals, not to the US government apparatus, and certainly not to a particular political party. Such marxists, and that is what they are, ought to be sttod up against a wall and ...


Read More Comments