Any other day traders here?
Are you in the group that doesn't know about Bernie's moronic FTT?
Or are you in the one that knows it will never pass, so don't give a fuck?
>>980273
I'm a futures trader and his nonsense doesn't apply to me. If you are trading stocks, you are already fucking retarded. If you are successful at trading, why not trade futures with cheaper taxes and higher leverage?
>b-but muh penny stocks
Fuck off Tim
>>980273
What is this?
>>980285
Bernie wants to tax all stock trades to give people "free things"
>>980285
A Financial Transaction Tax.
Rather than base it on profit, this genius wants to base it on value. That way, if you buy $50K of stock and sell it for $50K, you owe him tax on $100,000. At .50 per $100 (that's the rate), you'd be paying $500, whether or not the trade is successful.
>>980278
Actually, I trade both.
Can't argue the tax and leverage implications, they are more favorable for futures.
Are there other factors you could elaborate on, since, you know, I'm fucking retarded?
>>980290
Nice, I support this.
I wasn't even going to vote in the next election but now I'm resolute on voting for Sanders. Thanks for the info!
>>980293
Haha.
Beat it you loser hippie.
Take your gibsmedat and fuck off
>>980297
inb4 movie created to make bankers and investing look evil
oh wait
inb4 Bernie Sanders uses such movie to his leverage
Bernie is so fucking retarded, I can't believe he's a serious candidate and that dumb tumble girls keep shilling for him
>>980301
misguided yes, but people are tired of the fat cats anon.
>>980290
It's not that bad of an idea, but it's not that good of an idea either. I see the beneficial effects it would have, but morally a $1 per trade would better and more beneficial. Anyone who's trading in less than $50 lots shouldn't be in or care about that but any tax on transaction is basically unacceptable unless it's nominal i.e. a 1% of 1% tax.
>>980273
I work at a trading firm. Most people here would gladly pay up in taxes if it meant some hft firms would be priced out of the market
>>980386
>prop firm
So retarded traders that have no idea what they are talking about.
Personally I like the idea of a 1% tax on securities purchased, it means if you trade you have to be aiming for more than 1% per trade but the effects on liquidity would not be positive - sometimes securities are purchased for reasons other than cutting a profit.
>>980395
>implying less liquidity is a good thing
HFTs are literally nothing more than market makers. Take your "muh front running" meme back to Reddit.
>implying taxing securities is a good idea
>implying foreigners don't trade American securities
>implying foreigners won't mind paying for American education
This man is a moron tbqh
>>980364
>misguided yes, but people are tired of the fat cats anon
He's not punishing the fat cats though.
Why won't socialists realize that you CANNOT punish fatcats? Every single one of their proposed policies only hurts the middle and low class.
Minimum wage - Hurts unskilled workers(Does not affect upper-class significantly)
Ridiculous business taxes - Hurts small Business owners(HELPS the big corporations since they got no competition now)
"Free" healthcare - Costs a shit ton in taxes if you're not a NEET, overall worse quality
Raising income/capital gains tax - Rich don't care they can put it in a bank in some random fucking place
>>980397
most hft strategies are arbitraging proprietary order-book data.
For example, the ask you see is $5. You think, "that sounds good, I'll put in a buy order". You send your order to the exchange, it takes about a minute. The exchange puts your order into the book and sends that data to an HFT firm who has contracted with them. So now the HFT firm sees BOTH the $5 sell and your buy order, and sends in a buy that gets executed before yours and a sell that is used to fill your order.
Sounds fishy? It is. But it is relatively new (considering how fast regulatory bodies move) and above congress' heads so they haven't legislated against it yet. Both HFTs and exchanges are making money off of you doing this, so they will continue doing it as long as its legal.
I have nothing against HFTs. In theory, yeah, they would provide liquidity. However, they're not trading with the same access to information as us. They shouldn't have that kind of access to the order book.
>>980389
Better than someone who shitposts in Robinhood threads all day and thinks he's the wolf of Wall Street cause he got an Econ degree from zerohedge. Please tell me how there wouldn't be a net upside from pricing out hfts. I know everyone here is role playing some high schoolers characature of an Ayn Rand protagonist but you need to calm down when you see the word tax
>>980408
You have a really shitty broker if it takes minutes for your order to fill. Also, you are retarded for using market orders.
>>980407
> you can't punish fat cats
tax everyone making over $250k a year more.
problem?
Inb4 "well they'll leave the country!". they won't.
NOOOOOO THE SOCIALIST LIBERAL RETARD SCUM ARE SENDING MEN WITH GUNS TO TAKE MY MONEY AWAY!!
DON'T THEY KNOW HOW HARD I WORK TO MAKE MONEY SPECULATING ON THE MARKET WITH THE MONEY I INHERITED FROM PARENTS!?!?!?!?
IF POOR PEOPLE ARE SO POOR, THEN THEY SHOULD JUST INVEST THEIR MONEY IN THE STOCK MARKET INSTEAD OF STEALING ALL MY HARD WORK!!!
>>980412
Except they will. Hedge Fund Managers and other business owners from the US are already moving their businesses and home to Puerto Rico for 4% income tax and tax free dividend income.
It's a new tax plan created trying to rebuild Puerto Rico.
To qualify, an individual must not have been a resident of Puerto Rico within in the last 15 years. You must become a resident of Puerto Rico by December 31, 2035, and you must reside there for at least 183 days a year. You also have to do the paperwork, filing an application with the tax authority there. Once that’s approved, it’s a binding contract and you’ll get:
>Tax-free interest and dividends earned after you become a resident.
>No long-term capital gains tax on appreciation after you become a resident.
>5% tax on long-term capital gain for appreciation before you move for any sales during your first 10 years as a resident.
Puerto Rico also has great incentives for business owners. If you have a business that can be moved, that can be a real tax home run both for you and the company.
Puerto Rico is a US territory, so you get to keep your US citizenship.
>>980273
>FTT
I think Bernie wants this for currencies not securities.
>>980412
>tax everyone making over $250k a year more.
>problem?
Yes big problem. They can and will leave the country if they cannot find loopholes and ways to evade those taxes.
It NEVER works. The only vulnerable class is the Middleclass. Because they have things to lose yet not enough to be extremely flexible and able to do whatever they want.
It's the same with minimum wage increases. In retarded socialist theory, yes it will make businesses "share their profits more", in reality it crushes small business owners and allows only the massive, established companies to exist.
Walmart will probably fire some people and make other changes to take on $15 min wage, but they will exist. That Lebanese mom and pop shop that makes a pitiful profit margin while working 60 hours a week and can barely afford 2 employees? Good fucking luck.
>>980421
This.
There is and always will be some shitty newly discovered Island where they have like a few percent flat income tax and want rich businessmen to bring them their money.
>>980288
>>980297
>>980300
>>980301
>>980406
>wwaaaaaaahhhhhhhh, aaahhhhh bloo bloo bloo
>I can't be a parasite on the economy anymore through speculation
>>980434
>WAAHHHHHHHHHH WAHHHHHH TAX THE RICH
>WAHHHH IT'S NOT FAIR SOME PEOPLE HAVE MORE THAN ME WAHHHHH!!!
>PEOPLE SHOULD BE FORCED TO PAY FOR MY POOR DECISIONS!!! WAHHHH
>#BLACKLIVESMATTER
>WHITE STRAIGHT MEN ARE LITERALLY HITLER WAHHHH
>I AM A STRONG FEMINIST BUT IF U USE THE WRONG PRONOUNS I WILL CRY AND MAKE A LONG TUMBLR POST ABOUT U
>WAHHHH WAHHHH THE RICH ARE EVIL WAHH AWAHHH
>MY LIBERALS ARTS DEGREE SHOULD BE FREE WAHH
>#FEELTHEBERN
>>980443
>wwwwaaaaaahhhhh
>but I deserve to make money doing something objectively harmful
>I shouldn't be forced to get a job that's productive!
Haha, you can literally hear the butthurt dripping and pooling up under your post.
>>980456
>>but I deserve to make money doing something objectively harmful
How is investing "objectively harmful"?
>>980459
It isn't. He's just a loser that wants to align himself with the state because he's insignificant.
>>980459
Oh fuck, not this bullshit again. I'm not going to get drawn out into another day-long explanation, but I will say this:
Your "investing" is actually speculation in relatively mature companies that don't need the additional capital. The fluctuation in their stock prices are governed more by external factors like federal reserve policy than internal factors like company performance. So in effect you're just wasting the capital and your gains are mostly the result of upward wealth transfer, not fresh capital generation.
If you want more than that, you'll have to look it up somewhere else.
>>980468
I like how they think they're fighting the establishment when they ARE the establishment. In everything they do as well.
>>980472
>Wahh wahh I made up some dumb explanation why I'm a loser and other people making money without hurting others is bad and it should be banned to subsidize my free college and my free healthcare
Better yet, why not just ban everyone superior to you from the country? Sounds like you'd really enjoy that.
>>980472
What you just said is a complete joke. Do you love eating shit on a daily basis?
>>980472
>that don't need the additional capital
How is it that at the heart of every one of these arguments there's always some regulatory hack attempting to decide what it is people do or don't need?
>>980486
>accuses others of not "believing in economics"
>believes the Fed is the focal point of economic happenings and that companies don't need any more capital than what he deems necessary
What are you going to plug next, negative interest rates as a form of fighting upwards wealth transfer?
>>980425
It could work but it would require every other stable country in the world to do the same thing, and tax higher.
Not too many countries are willing to undercut themselves on the order of trillions.
>>980516
>It could work but it would require every other stable country in the world to do the same thing, and tax higher
They never will tho, that's my point.
There's always some loophole for $50million+ networth people that is completely inaccessible to others.
>>980472
They are not getting more capital you moron. They need to reissue stock to do so. The whole stock market is a secondary market.
>>980386
>gladly pay up in taxes
No, they wouldn't.
Who in their right mind would pay taxes when they LOSE money on a trade?
This is designed to crush trading, pure and simple, your firm included.
Bernie thinks trading is bad news.
>>980527
Not directly, but higher prices = more compensation for management with stock options.
>>980459
>How is investing "objectively harmful"?
Bernie told them it was.
"Traders are evil!" he croaked.
>>980589
Most employment stock option contracts are shit.
the terms on are frequently onerous and the stock options usually offer a flat discount, and take significant amounts of time to mature.
This would decrease liquidity. Probably by a significant amount.
The financial sector is literally pure administrative overhead to society. To top it all off they have pretty much no oversight thanks to minimal regulation. Remember that when you fuck another hard working person in the ass, swindlers.
>>980885
The financial sector has the responsibility of allocating working capital towards the most profitable ( = beneficial to everyone ) businesses.
Wether it does so efficiently or not is a different question, but any large business needs management.
And if we take the planet as a whole, it's an immense business.
>>980888
Organizations have a fiduciary duty to do anything possible, including illegal and unethical measures, to earn as much profit as possible. Measures that could be a net loss for society as a whole, but profitable for the company.
>>980905
>Organizations
I'm not an organization.
Can you explain to me why I should get screwed by this dickhead's policies?
He could have easily made a distinction between corporate and individual trading.
>>980885
How exactly is it that either institutional or retail traders screw the average person?
Aside from anomalous market crises type situations caused directly from heavy manipulation?
Is it because you're indignant about the fact that me and my buddies sit on computers all day and make 100s of thousands of dollars and you're left to do the work that no one wants to do but that is absolutely vital to keep society functioning such as spending 12 hours a day in a factory putting together some bullshit set of items that literally no one really needs? Or going to work every day to write code for some bullshit app or software that literally everybody could do without? Or working in a sector of a government which is completely superfluous to begin with?
I'm sick and tired of hearing this 'traders are bad people, they're parasites'. As if you worked some fucking honest laborious job absolutely necessary to the infrastructure of society.
Stop being bitter about the fact that you're too stupid to trade.
>>980922
You would no longer have to compete with organizations who have a server farm at the stock exchange pumping out orders every 20 milliseconds.
>>980931
Funny thing is that literally all of those occupations you listed create more value to society than you do, Uncle Tom.
Enjoy spending other people's money hard earned money, I guess. You've sure earned it.
>>980421
Wow, Puerto Rico finally has at least something going for it.
>>980951
No, no they do not. Not by a long shot.
But hey, a degree in mathematics from a top university in England makes me feel like I have. You see when you were out dicking around I was inside with my nose in a book. It's poetic, really.
>>980944
You're ducking the question, or you don't understand what taxing value instead of profit means.
No trader with half a brain would continue under the policy Bernie has proposed. Paying taxes on losing trades? That's just insanity, which is why we're all glad that shit will never happen.
>>980931
>How exactly is it that either institutional or retail traders screw the average person?
These idiots always have some bullshit rationale for claiming this.
Like that "value to society" crap. As if that shit isn't completely subjective. Or "I don't like it, so it should be illegal".
Trade on, brother. We'll keep making money while they gripe about it.
>>980434
You people act like only greedy rich people in suits and cigars on wallstreet trade stocks.
If you have ANY retirement funds, you trade stocks.
>>980290
Is he fucking stupid? This effectively wipes out everyones fucking retirement funds. Like 90% of a stocks value is capital gains potential. You drastically lower the possibility of capital gains you non only put investing solely in the hands of hedge funds that have millions to leverage on trades, but you will crash the value of stocks in general because nobody can get capital gains without massive risks. RIP everyones 401k and IRAs.
>>981114
No, not stupid.
His team figured out that threatening something like this will draw in the uninformed who want to "punish wall street". Both the value taxing nature of the proposal and the fact it applies to individuals as well are buried, leaving the voter to falsely conclude it's a measure that taxes corporations on their excess profits.
He knows it couldn't pass in it's current form, even if he wins, so it's really just saber rattling.
>>981141
Then go ahead and leave, faggot. We don't want the willfully ignorant here.
>>981146
You have been consistently blown the fuck out the entire thread.
There is no proving you wrong, it doesn't matter what anyone posts you will just say "No you're a parasite" in response to paragraphs of an answer.
>>981152
>only one person that disagrees with you browses 4chan
Wow, it's getting awfully stupid in here.
>>981156
All of the people with your point of view got btfo.
You and him(which I suspect to also be you on your phone) have only posted ad-homs and when actually challenged you could not reply.
Why are you even on this board if you're against trading, on a ... business and finance board? Fuck off leftypol or something
>>981098
>everything's worth can be described in numbers alone
Hopefully one day you will be able to save up enough to cure your autism, senpai.
>>981166
It's almost like people have different opinions about things or something. On an internet message board. Who would have guessed?
>>981166
I haven't replied all day because I have better things to do than spend all my time on a Kazakh thumb twiddling board.
You people are beyond convincing anyway since you're so ideologicalally biased, so I figure that I'll just get some cheap laughs tormenting you people and your uneducated opinions.
>>981177
>You people are beyond convincing anyway since you're so ideologicalally biased, so I figure that I'll just get some cheap laughs tormenting you people and your uneducated opinions
But you are the one trying to convince people otherwise. We don't care what you communists think, whereas you seem to care what we think by constantly creating threads then being absolutely blown the fuck out and unable to respond.
You're not very good at debating, senpai.
>>981152
>There is no proving you wrong
Yep.
When someone thinks their belief is all that's necessary for proof, arguing with them is futile.
Vague economic statements and insults are all they have.
>>981182
>implying I'm a communist or even a socialist
lolno
Except when I do respond, instead of a reasonable debate all I get in response is a bunch of ego-stroking with "lol libruls r dum" instead of any sort of counter-evidence. So now I've just started trolling because it gets you riled up and it's funny to watch you guys say stupid, factually incorrect shit.
I'll try posting actual debate threads this weekend when I have more free time, and see how that goes again.
Also, a lot less of /biz/ agrees with you than you think.
>>980278
>why not trade futures with cheaper taxes and higher leverage?
because leverage is the killer of men
>>981193
>all I get in response
I don't know whether you're being obstinate, or just haven't bothered to read the thread.
It's been pointed out numerous times that the mechanics of this proposal would make trading completely unviable as a business, which is Sanders wet dream.
We're waiting for you to defend this idiocy.
>>980364
>top professionals
>clergy
let the adults talk
>>981193
>Also, a lot less of /biz/ agrees with you than you think.
Why would people against business and finance be on a business and finance board?
Whatever i'm just reporting and hiding these threads on sight now. Enjoy being retarded on your own
>>981201
>because leverage is the killer of men
wanna know how i know you're a peasant?
>>981203
Debating always takes too long with you people because you always try to change the subject, so for now all you're going to get is trolling because I'm busy.
>>981205
Because business and a properly functioning free market, as opposed misuses of financial power, are two completely different things. Also
>implying I have time to post more than a thread a day
Hmm, I think I feel my daily thread coming on right now, actually.
>>981217
>Debating always takes too long
>you always try to change the subject
Whatever dude. You just described exactly what you're doing.
>>981230
When you're putting in 18 hour days, people with dumb opinions on the internet suddenly seem less pressing. Who would have thought?
>>981233
When you're putting in 18 hour days
It's our fault you can't put together a cogent argument because you're busy busting your ass?
Then why did you even bother to respond in the first place?
>inb4 i thought i could win the argument back then
>>980290
I literally see nothing wrong with this.
It's effectively like a commission in forex, except the commission goes to the government to, you know, fund shit.
>>981260
My problem is that HFTs will probably lobby for a loophole leaving the average day trader at an even bigger disadvantage.
Oh well back to Robinhood I go.
>>980278
>doesn't apply to me
Kikefag sanders wants to exclusively create a fee for trading derivatives. It totally applies to risk taking derivative fags.
>>980364
>chart lumps everyone from the dindus to senior engineers into the same class
yeah no.
>>981260
>I literally see nothing wrong with this.
You see nothing wrong with someone paying $500 in tax on a trade that they lost money on anyway?
I guess that 's why you're not a trader. No trader would be profitable if that was the case. This isn't a tax on profit, it's on value. Which means what you pay in tax has zero to do with your profit.
I guess you think that when a car dealer pays $47,000 for a car and charges you $53,000 for it, he should pay tax on $100,000, not $6,000.
1) Bernie is a financially illiterate kuck that only panders to gimme dats
2) He has zero chance of being the nominee. Hillary literally has 1/5 of the delegates and they haven't even voted yet.
3) Because he has zero chance, he is free to make ridiculous claims, like the FTT and "free" everything.
4) Bernie supporters debate like typical liberals, meaning they will just throw ad homs, strawmen, and appeals to emotion at you. Even discussing his economic policies is a waste of your time. Take a drink every time you hear "muh bankers".
TLDR: Sage and report all Bernie threads. They are shitposting on /pol/ and they're shitposting on /biz/
>>980364
But you're either misguided or lying. In the movies, you would have the hero (SEC) "regulating" the shit out of Gordon Gekko.
In reality, you WILL have Gordon Gekko AT THE SEC.
Based on what I know from history, the best way you can disperse and minimize this fraud and corruption is strict property rights, strict torts, and divisions of power (free market).
Too many people are too ignorant on, it pisses me off. You think shareholders and executives/workers at securities/banking firms are going to request NOTHING in return from executive branch scrutiny?
The unintended consequence is REDUCED LIABILITY in court.
>>981346
"Executive branch scrutiny" means SEC agents crawling all around these firms. By the way, the best agents are THE SAME types of securities traders, they know the industry.
>>980475
Lel
>>980278
>trading equities or futures
>not providing the service of being able to trade options
>>980278
I'm a value investor looking for moat meme kind
I don't do derivates, don't understand em
>>981215
sure mortimer tell me
>>981459
because you believe inane, stupid shit like "leverage is the killer of men" LMFAO.
>>981474
it isn't stupid at all. how many people think "well if i get this ONE BET right, i'll be set!" and then lose their minds when their trade goes against them? i'm not saying it isn't tool and doesn't have its place but don't act like it doesn't fuck people over who aren't professional about it.
>>981450
>London is the financial capital of the world
My ass.
No one wants to pay your stupid ass SDRT,
that's why NYC is the trading capital of the world, not London.
Fuck Bernie and his plan to have us end up like you.
>>980951
Negative. The burger flippers and trash sorters would have less work if it wasn't for white collar folks, who need long hours of uninterrupted focus.
Most coders couldn't code anything other than complete bullshit. 19/20 are worthless skiddies.
>>980905
Its not unethical to do a better job than somebody.
Another thing. You fail to understand that profit is one of the highest moral imperatives. It allows you to spread your efficiency to others to live a better life.
Its clear you've never been responsible for another human being and putting food in other families bellies.
>>981136
Wall street is laden with risk enough, with bonds being a joke, because of the fed funds rate, you want to take funds out of medium risk and put them into mostly suicidal new business startups.
>>981201
Hahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha please go back and learn your fractions.
>>981346
This so much this.
>>981478
IF you use a chainsaw to cut down the money tree and lose your leg b/c you don't know how to do it. I'm sorry but you didn't read the instructions.
>Typing in capslock
>hahahahahahahaha
>responding to obvious b8
You really think a Berniebot would actually try to shill here? God you people are autistic.
>>981579
>that's why NYC is the trading capital of the world, not London.
making the distinction between financial and trading capitals are we?
obviously NYC is the trading capital because wall street employs so many traders.
but doesn't london make a bigger haul since it basically founded the fed?
IT LOOKS LIKE THE POUND JUST RIGGED A BIG SWING FOR THE YEN AND EURO WHAT ARE YOU UP TO
L O N D O N
O
N
D
O
N
>>981816
Did I faint? Am I too late?
>>981818
You blockhead.
>>981796
Well, that's my point.
If we had the sort of onerous regulations the UK does (SDRT, etc.), we wouldn't be the trading capital.
It's like the brilliant boat registration tax they introduced. It killed the industry here, while anyone affected registered their shit somewhere else, making it meaningless.
Playing the Franc? Looks pretty tight. Might be the end of the USD rally. Sure does look like the GBP is being held down, what's up with that
L O N D O N ?
O
N
D
O
N
?
>>981823
do go on, im not quite getting the point but i think there's a point to the regulations. "this is my market my london financial monopoly, go be a coke snorting wall street bum" sort of thing right?
>>981839
pic reltaed
>>981842
The point is that charging people 5 pounds on every 1,000 traded whether they profit or not is ridiculous.
Am I correct that that's how your SDRT system works?
>>981860
oh wow, and i've no clue. im interested in tax havens and the going american rate of about 35% on gains.
>>981875
Oh, that isn't a tax on profit. i have no idea about UK tax structure. But their stamp duty is supposed to be kind of like what Sanders is proposing. Tax the value of a trade, so you can get money whether the person taxed profits or not.
>>981883
maybe it's a good idea for an hm with the hm's face on the money but seems like it wouldn't do anything good for liquidity and ease of swindling for london so i vote no.
>>981890
I can't see how it's a good idea for anyone.
What idiot would trade knowing they'll be taxed whether they profit or not?
>>981890
btw im an american and hm = her majesty and i meand an hm gov. but in america i think tax rate should be flat 20%, 20% on corporate, top income rate and all capital gains regardless of income. no sales tax, but a 20% rate on regulated things like drugs and alcohol.
>>981895
>I can't see how it's a good idea for anyone.
>What idiot would trade knowing they'll be taxed whether they profit or not?
a good trader that has aims for reasonable profit margins with a high rate of accuracy.
but it would slash volumes, and manipulation.
>>981898
That's crazy.
One of the biggest advantages of our tax setup is that you can write losses off against gains, balancing things out.
You can't just tell people, "we'll be hitting you for $1000 per 100K trade, so you better make over $1000 every time". That's ludicrous.
>>981902
>You can't just tell people, "we'll be hitting you for $1000 per 100K trade, so you better make over $1000 every time". That's ludicrous.
You can just tell people that and if you have the proper authority it'll happen. It's ludicrous for America though, but a trading strategy based on the tax structure is a lame one.
Buy a share with a target in mind, it could go down for a while but if it reaches you're in the money and that $1,000 is just another lump of taxes, it's not that big of a big deal.
But in America the way America is set up today it won't fly, not even by me. Bernie's a comedian.
>>981902
>You can't just tell people, "we'll be hitting you for $1000 per 100K trade, so you better make over $1000 every time". That's ludicrous.
Bernie can just tell people that and the hipster liberals will gobble it up like Turkeys.
>>981296
Holy shit.
Are you really that dependant on being coddled by favoritist tax laws?
>>981915
>favoritist tax laws
Only someone who doesn't understand the way the tax works would say that.
>>981907
Assume a trader makes the same $50K value trade every day for a week:
3 days he makes $250 each, 2 days he loses $250 each.
Under our current system, he walks with $250, of which he'll keep maybe $150.
Under Bernie's plan, he'll be taxed $500 every day, bringing his haul to a lovely -$2,250.
>inb4: nu uh, that's not how it works
As a trader who's margins would be affected negatively by this, to say the least, I know exactly how this shit plan would work.
>>981923
Assuming a trader is such a loser he/she should get a real job instead of being extremely mediocre and accomplishing nothing that London couldn't do for pennies on the million dollars with a computer algorithm.
>>981929
>Assuming a trader is such a loser
nice
>>981934
But it's true. Taxes aren't there because they're somehow 'fair'. Every tax hurts someone. What you can do with taxes is encourage people to engage in the kinds of behaviours you want, and discourage the ones you don't want. High frequency speculative trading and price manipulation is bad for the market overall, and just makes profits for gamblers. A transaction tax encourages investment in long-term growth, not the chasing of short-term gain, while also ensuring that the state sees a slice of the pie. If that's better for the market and society as a whole, then day traders can go and fuck themselves, frankly. The universe doesn't owe them a living.
>>980472
>More capital
Their IPOs were a long, long, long time ago buddy.
When a trader makes a trade that is successful, this means he successfully allocated resources in the most effective way.
When a trader makes a trade that is unsuccessful, this means he allocated resources in an ineffective way.
In such a manner is market efficiency maintained.
>>982268
>discourage the ones you don't want
>High frequency speculative trading and price manipulation is bad for the market overall
I'm not doing either of these things, hence what I do is not "bad for the market overall".
So why should I get screwed by a tax intended to punish this?
Oh that's right, because you and some other dumbfucks like Sanders believe it's your job to make it harder for people to make short term gains. Not that you have any evidence. Because you think it's evil, and "muh market stability".
Like my purchase of 1,000 shares of anything moves the market in one direction or another.
Jesus you people are stupid.
>>980951
Do you remember the old school merchants from centuries ago? Even in Ancient Rome there were people already buying and selling huge amounts of goods constantly.
These people were necessary to create volume on the market. To indirectly get the goods where they would be sold for the highest price.
This is still true today for our modern traders. They are needed to create volume on the market.
Without these people there would be no volume. In the long term more transaction per time unit means prices that get closer to their actual volume. More trade = better prices.
I understand how you think "they create nothing real" but that do actually deliver a very valuable service to the whole world. They try to always look for possibilities to trade when profitable, thus creating transactions and thus better prices globally.
I got a question here for the traders btw.
Is buying some Vanguard REIT for the long term a good idea? It looks pretty save with a good dividend yield and value gain. However is it risky or not?
>>982378
Ok, thanks man!
>>982268
>High frequency trading = speculation/price manipulation
That's simply incorrect. If they were gambling it would be worse for your argument, because they would be the ones to lose big when the market turns and give up all the gains they made to the long term buyers.
These people are taking tremendous risks to make pennies. More power to them. They also create a more stable more liquid trading environment.
>>982325
So what? I'm no leftist, but I recognise that the state needs to make a certain amount of money through taxes in order to fund its activities. There are a shitload of ways of raising those taxes, and the question is what is the 'fairest' way to raise them, and how do you minimise the negative impacts on the economy. If a tax will raise a few billion, and the only impact is that it puts people like you out of a job, where's the negative? Yes, liquidity might take a bit of a hit, but the market functions pretty happily in London, there will still be plenty of transactions, your predictions of the sky falling in are somewhat overblown. Taxes on profits, capital gains, income, sales, and property are all worse for the economy than a modest FTT, so I'd rather the transaction tax than a hike in any of the others. Taxes always screw someone, you just don't like the fact that this one would screw you.
>>982750
Well no shit the state needs taxes.
Unfortunately, you can't even demonstrate that you know how the one being discussed works. Or that you could even be bothered to devote the time to figure it out. So you really can't argue it at all.
Instead, you spout worthless soundbites about "fair" and act is if it's a choice between this horseshit plan and putting orphans in the street.
>If the only impact is that it puts you out of a job, where's the negative?
What a hypocrite.
>>982764
Man, get a load of this greedy jew.
He thinks he's entitled to not pay taxes like everyone else has to on their business activity and yet he's accusing everyone else of being entitled for thinking his business activity should be taxed too. He's a got an iron death grip on his precious little shekels and he'd sacrifice anything to save them.
>>980273
>Or are you in the one that knows it will never pass, so don't give a fuck?
Bern must be getting lines from Hillaryous because any tax per trade that is based on %'s won't fly in America for at least a million years.
>>982764
I know how it works, a small tax on every trade, some loss of market liquidity, a much-debated impact on GDP. It will make it harder, if not impossible, to day trade (though people manage to find ways to day trade in London and Hong Kong). It's not a choice between this and starving the orphans, it's that a small FTT might have less impact on the wider economy than an equivalent increase in taxes in other areas. Your argument seems to consist purely of butthurt that you'll be the one hit by the tax, the one upset about 'fairness' is you. I'm just pointing out that no tax is fair to the person that winds up paying it.
>>982786
On the other hand a $1 per trade would be super effective, but 1% would be completely destructive.
>>982764
>Instead, you spout worthless soundbites about "fair" and act is if it's a choice between this horseshit plan and putting orphans in the street.
> Anon illustrating his/her lack of good boy points.
>>982787
>it's that a small FTT might have less impact on the wider economy than an equivalent increase in taxes in other areas.
The wall street revolt would result in billions of deaths annually adjusted fractionally to GDP.
Wall Street will eat London alive.
>>982350
>This is still true today for our modern traders. They are needed to create volume on the market.
>Without these people there would be no volume. In the long term more transaction per time unit means prices that get closer to their actual volume. More trade = better prices.
Most of them are distorting spot prices and creating "bad volume"; or volume used to make indirect profits and potentially with a direct net loss. Whether they are creating a net gain or loss in spot prices they are still manipulating price sin favor of irrational behavior. There's hardly anything of value lost without the participation of these parties encouraging irrational operation.
The net effect of them being taxed into oblivion or irrelevance is simply a more predictable market and less income disparity between different styles of professional traders. Basically traders would recognize their profit margin limit and thus pool capital to reduce overhead.
>>980273
> Are you in the group that doesn't know about Bernie's moronic FTT?
Not a day trader, but I know about it. I've been following it because it relates to a research project of mine.
Europe seems like they're set on passing one fairly soon. Bernie will never become president so he'll never get it passed himself, but Hillary might carry the mantle and advocate for it because muh populism.
Link to Senate bill: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/1371
>>980292
>Can't argue the tax and leverage implications, they are more favorable for futures.
Confusingly enough though, Sanders' scheme only taxes derivatives at 0.005% for some reason. That seems a bit too exploitable as you can always just create an almost identical position using derivatives. Don't buy stock, just buy calls with a strike price approaching zero and expire a million years from now.
>>980293
>>980384
>>980386
>>980634
That tax is fucking poison.
To be fair, it hits day traders, algos, and institutional investors first, sure, and it might impact them more directly than everyone else. But ultimately the cost of transaction it imposes gets reflected in the price. If a 0.5% tax on stocks was enacted overnight, it would be 0.5% more costly to buy and you'd also lose that half-percent return when you eventually close your position. And stocks are traded far more often than simply twice.
tl;dr: It's bad for you if you own pretty much any financial asset. It's also bad for pension funds. Actually it pretty much hurts everyone, though if you don't have any exposure to financial markets then a lot less directly obviously.
The worst fucking part about it is that it doesn't really raise more than a few billion dollars. Like it'll raise 0.05% of GDP while decreasing actual GDP by like an order of magnitude. It'd be a fucking disaster.
>>981450
UK probably profits from it because they provide financial services to other countries which makes up for any deadweight loss.
>>980472
>wasting the capital
What am I even reading.
The capital isn't "wasted" you fucking moron, by trading your cash for someone else's assets in the secondary market, you're making that cash available to someone else. That money can, and will, be invested somewhere else somewhere down the line where it's needed.
>>982750
>Taxes on profits, capital gains, income, sales, and property are all worse for the economy than a modest FTT
They actually raise taxes more directly and efficiently, and most of them aren't nearly as distortionary. The only reason they're "worse" is because they comprise a larger fraction of income. An FTT sounds painless to most people because it sounds like Wall Street is the only one who'll pay for it.
Brahs, which job should I pick
-Options trading firm with 70k$ starting salary (including bonus), quick promotion to about 130k after 12-18 months (plus bonus), but upside limited to 500k or so
-Futures prop trading firm in chicago with meagre starting salary (15k$) but they train you up for several months after which you trade with the firms capital and get to keep most of your profit. they've guys making a million after 2-4 years but not everybody. mean salary is about 300-400k. 85th percentile earns about a millioin
>>980386
>i work at a trading firm and hate how HFT has cut spreads and commissions
sure ya do buddy
>>980905
but this is false. fiduciary duty is a legal term and it is not applied to corporate management.
>>982787
>a small tax on every trade
lol
I knew you didn't understand how it worked.
>>982851
>An FTT sounds painless to most people because it sounds like Wall Street is the only one who'll pay for it
Politics in a nutshell.
>>982892
Futures fo sho.
>>982781
Wow, the stupid in your post.
I pay thousands of dollars in taxes every year, and I don't trade because I have to.
But if I decide to stop and say fuck it, the Fed and State will stop receiving this money from me.
Everyone's happy, right?
>>983034
are you chinese?
>>982781
You are sorely projecting, I am not even sure if you are joking.
>>983030
This is why the least worst tax is a tax on the unimproved value of land. Not only do owners have to write a check, it is hard to "offshore" land.
Most taxation is hidden, which is why there is such a disconnect between government spending and taxation.
In the US, securities held less than one year are subject to NORMAL income tax rates, and if you include state rates, may reach a 50% marginal rate. Couple this with the double taxation of the "corporate income tax" which is shared by employees, shareholders, and consumers,
Who's the greedy little shit now?
>>983029
Every trade attracts a tax of 0.01 percent of the value of any stock, bond, derivative, etc. That's the broad summary, or are you arguing it's something else altogether?
>>983115
Yes. You seem to be under the impression that I should consider that a problem.
>>983160
Not at all.
I understand that you believe raising someone's tax burden 2000% is all well and good, based upon your interpretation of their worth to society.
I believe we are done here.
>>983176
That's in your one rather weakly thought-out example. A trader making an average of half a percent a trade would still keep 80% of that, they might just need to sit on the stock for a bit longer than 5 minutes in order to realise it. Nice to know that your only objection to this is because you'll have to pay more taxes, not because of any sound economic reasoning. Most businesses are burdened with payroll, sales, and corporation taxes. Like I say, every tax looks unfair to the guy paying it, the universe doesn't owe you a living, don't confuse your desire to make money gambling on stocks with a right to make money gambling on stocks.
>>982268
You really have no idea how tax law works, do you?
Once a tax law is established it will always NEVER be abolished again. In the worst case they will increase the tax overall in a few decades.
You just don't lose tax laws. Once the object and subject are established and it is clear they can make money you can be sure the tax law won't dissapear in a century.
The same happened in Europe with the VAT taxes which were meant as a tax to fund the wars. They never actually dissapeared. They will remain there for ever. Every new tax is a massive loss for society as a whole.
Fuckin cry babys . Pay your taxes and shut the fuck up. Love it or leave it. No matter which person becomes president this will still be America. And for those that dont want to pay thier taxes can get the fuck out. Fuckin traitorous jew wallstreet scum.
>>982842
>Like it'll raise 0.05% of GDP while decreasing actual GDP by like an order of magnitude. It'd be a fucking disaster.
very funny you bullshit artist, it would more likely increase GDP because excess capital would change directions.
The Bern can't propose taxing derivitives at the same rate because they're used primarily to cut risk and ensure profitability, naturally it applies as a tax on corporate sales - before profits.
As for your bit on stocks getting impacted price-wise, prices would likely get more competitive because there would be a cost added to the old manipulation game of "holding shares hostage" which inflates PPS so investors would likely benefit.
If you dont like taxes, simply "bet" on market movements, without buying or borrowing the asset like the case with stocks or cfds. Actually last time i checked cfds are banned in states, lol.
>>980293
Back to where you belong.
>>983794
Your butthurt is delicious.
>>983072
>This is why the least worst tax is a tax on the unimproved value of land. Not only do owners have to write a check, it is hard to "offshore" land.
No, it's the progressive income tax that's the least worst in a fiat monetary system. You make income in US dollars depending on infrastructure. If you're not making income depending on infrastructure you could barter and thus avoid taxation. All other taxes should be nominal, but capital gains taxes being level with the highest income tax bracket makes sense too because technically it's not a 0 sum game and it's taxpayer financed.
