| reply to amigo_boy
Re: Obama's Jobs Tour a PR stunt - don't expect jobs Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that almost all of the companies that received tarp funds have paid it back or announced that they will pay it back soon, exceptions being citigroup, GM and Chrystler, who apparently cannot afford to pay it back and would be weakened further by a transaction tax.
A transaction tax would not be cataclysmic and its effects on investor behavior would be subtle, but I do not think it would bring a positive effect, aside from increasing tax revenue. If the goal is simply to increase tax revenue, I do not see how it would be preferrable to raising income tax or capital gains tax, which I am not in favor of either.
I do not consider the discouragement of speculative investments to be a worthy goal - too much of our economy is based on consumption, not investment. |
|
Reviews:
 ·magicjack.com
| said by hoyleysox:Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that almost all of the companies that received tarp funds have paid it back or announced that they will pay it back soon I don't know. I googled and found this article from August:
quote:
The bottom line: Taxpayers put $204.4 billion into the banks through CPP and have received $70.2 billion in principal, ... Today, 633 banks still owe the Treasury $134.2 billion.
-- »www.slate.com/id/2226517/
Maybe you can search for more recent info.
Either way, if there's not much left to repay, then the transaction tax wouldn't last long.
Mark |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
kudos:1 | reply to hoyleysox
said by hoyleysox:Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that almost all of the companies that received tarp funds have paid it back or announced that they will pay it back soon, exceptions being citigroup, GM and Chrystler, who apparently cannot afford to pay it back and would be weakened further by a transaction tax. Thats only of the "major" firms as defined by MSM. |
|
