This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

David Stockman Says US Has "Run Out Of Runway" On Debt, Compares The Treasury Market To A "Roach Hotel", Endorses A Tobin Tax

Tyler Durden's picture


David Stockman has become every major news organization's (and CNBC) go to critic when it comes to bashing each stupid idea currently preoccupying the DC C-grade soap opera artists. Obviously, at the current time this would mean the budget deficit and the debt ceiling. On both those issues, Stockman's position is well-known. Today, when asked by Bloomberg's Tom Keene to compare the current deficit with that of Reagan's, Stockman spares no praise: "The essential distinction is that we had a clean balance sheet then - $1
trillion of national debt. Today we have $14 trillion in national
debt.  We have used up all the runway, so to speak. We
have piled our national balance sheet with so much debt that the
government is at the very edge of a huge solvency crisis that isn't
going to be addressed unless both parties dramatically change their
position, and I see no sign of it.  So we're going to have a gong show." Stockman also opines on the Monetary Roach Hotel that the US debt has become: "We have not had a two-way bond market.  We have had a rigged
market that has been dominated by not just the Fed, but all the central
banks.  Today over half of the $9 trillion in publicly-held debt is in
central bank vaults. I call it the 'Monetary Roach Hotel.'" Lastly, on a proposal endorsed by Zero Hedge back in the summer of 2009, namely the introduction of a Tobin tax for Wall Street's high-frequency casino: "Wall Street needs to have a transaction tax.  I know they won't like it.
A tax on every trade, a small amount, would go a long way to putting
money in the coffers." As usual: absolutely spot on recommendations, which have little to no chance of occurring before the final bond crash finally takes away the multiple-use heroin needle from both DC and Wall Street.

Stockman on what's different regarding the deficit under Obama vs. Reagan:
"The essential distinction is that we had a clean balance sheet then - $1 trillion of national debt. Today we have $14 trillion in national debt.  We have used up all the runway, so to speak."
"We have piled our national balance sheet with so much debt that the government is at the very edge of a huge solvency crisis that isn't going to be addressed unless both parties dramatically change their position, and I see no sign of it.  So we're going to have a gong show. Year after year after year of these debt ceiling crises, maybe they will be solved for a month or two, and then we will go right to the next." 
Stockman on the deficit to GDP ratio:
"When this all started, it was 30% national debt to GDP.  Now, effectively what's built in will take us as close to 100% within a matter a couple years.  That is baked into the cake and cannot be stopped."
"I think the more important thing is the annual deficit to GDP.  It should be a balance over the cycle, but we have not had any balance over the cycle for decades…We were petrified in 1982 when the deficit went to 6%, the highest ever seen. Reagan, although he is known as a great tax cutter, signed a huge tax increase bill in 1982 at the bottom of the worst recession that we'd had up until then and raised taxes by the tune of 1.5% of GDP." 
On the issues with the current market:
"We have not had a two-way bond market.  We have had a rigged market that has been dominated by not just the Fed, but all the central banks.  Today over half of the $9 trillion in publicly-held debt is in central bank vaults. I call it the 'Monetary Roach Hotel.' Bonds go in and never come out. If the central banks stopped buying the debt, which will happen with the end of QE2, then we're going to get back into a real investor's market, a two-way market where some people don't believe that Congress and the White House have the capacity to deal with our problems.  I think then we run the risk that we'll get real pricing on the debt, which has to be a lot more than 3%." 
On how the debt ceiling debate will be resolved:
"I do not know that there's any process that can solve it.  We're so far down the road here that I think it will take a thundering conflagration in the global bond market to wake up the process and get people out of their positions...Look at the current White House. We had Geithner last night saying, you don't dare not raise the debt ceiling, but the policy of this administration is de facto default. They have a war budget as big as Bush ever had, therefore, extending 75% of the Bush tax cuts. The only thing they have objected to is the 2% risk."
On why we should care about the debt ceiling:
"I do not think we should care about the debt ceiling, because they will extend it when push comes to shove at the 11th hour after a lot of smoke and mirrors and tricks have been played...What we should care about is the fact that we're borrowing $6 billion every business day.  Both parties have taken fiscal positions that will not even begin to close the gap.  Both parties are simply aligned, deceiving the public that there will not be sacrifice.  There will be. Tax increases across the board for the entire middle class, not just the rich." 
Stockman on whether the tax base needs to be broadened:
"I think bring the tax base or have new tax revenue sources.  We are in a stage where I think a tax on imported oil might be one way to get two birds with one stone.  Revenue into the coffers of the Treasury and also some incentive for more conservation, domestic production, and alternative energy. 
"Secondly, Wall Street needs to have a transaction tax.  I know they won't like it. A tax on every trade, a small amount, would go a long way to putting money in the coffers."


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:03 | 1288329 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

Abolish the fed, pay off the debt in clownbux, pay as you go. Fvck Wall Street.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:16 | 1288419 TheTmfreak
TheTmfreak's picture

One is the going rate for clownbux nowadays? 100 Monopoly dollars?

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:47 | 1288550 l1xx3r
l1xx3r's picture

Shouldn't your pic be yellow and black? Just wondering because my understanding is that red and black mean anarcho-communism... which is self contradicting... in communism, you can only violently force people to not use money... and that requires a government and leadership which contradicts the anarcho part of that flag.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:04 | 1288632 pan-the-ist
pan-the-ist's picture

Obviously you understand neither Anarchism nor Communism, so you aught to just leave it there.

Imagine your starting point for utopia as an elagatarian society without greed and with abundant resources where people work because they desire to.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:12 | 1288646 aerojet
aerojet's picture

Sounds extremely far-fetched.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:05 | 1288835 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

Now imagine a society of isolated individuals with no attachment to anything but greed, competing against one another for pieces of paper to purchase from strangers commodities they're incapable of producing on their own but necessary for survival.

That's far more practical, right?

Now, as a cherry on top, make said system DEPENDENT on a government that DEMANDS you tie yourself to this market order, threatening to kill you if you don't.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 21:32 | 1289868 l1xx3r
l1xx3r's picture

Only without governments will true free markets exists. Who would trade crap paper when there would be better alternatives.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:16 | 1288663 l1xx3r
l1xx3r's picture

Obviously you don't understand capitalism. In my view, communism tries the make the rich poor, socialism distorts and stagnates things, and capitalisms tries to make the poor rich. Greed cannot exists in true free market capitalism (without violence) because you can only benefit by increasing the benefit of others (kings didnt even have flushing tolets and now most of the "poor" do thanks to capitalism). Communism can exist in a Anarcho-Capitalist type society by people agreeing to live under that type of contract, but capitalism cannot exist within communism. So the choice is clear, I prefer to allow everyone the choice of how to live and not force them into something.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:25 | 1288695 pan-the-ist
pan-the-ist's picture

You cannot see beyond the redistribution of wealth (or any infringement upon your fragile ego), so you will never get it.  Stop trying, you just get it wrong.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:30 | 1288713 l1xx3r
l1xx3r's picture

Funny, because I actually bring up points, which you don't seem to notice. You seem to just be like "Believe cause I say so", which didn't work when I was pushed towards religion when I was yonger. If you have any points, please bring them up. Otherwise shut-up.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:33 | 1288732 pan-the-ist
pan-the-ist's picture

I am talking about anachrocommunism, I don't know what you are talking about..? Stalinism?

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:39 | 1288753 l1xx3r
l1xx3r's picture

anarcho-communism is self contracticting as I first stated, including why I thought it was. Your reply was I was wrong, which you have yet to prove. So my original stance holds unless you can actually argue against it.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:18 | 1288902 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Anarcho-communism is self- consistent, as is anarcho-capitalism. The only difference between the two is that the anarcho capitalist recognizes the right to life and the right to own property, where anarcho-communists only recognize the right to life. Their failure to recognize the right to property makes them literal animals.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 19:44 | 1289383 TheTmfreak
TheTmfreak's picture

It is self contradictory as I see it. Anarchy Capitalism is the only reality. Everything else is falsified brainwashed bullshit.

Anarchy = A political system by which there is no "goverment"

Capitalism = The use of private capital for the sake of profits


Edit: I no longer think it is self-contradictory upon further thinking about it. I have actually thought about for some time the "similarities" with anarchy and "ideal" communism. The problem I have is what TM suggests about the difference. The lack of private property. "Everybody owns everything and everybody." There isn't a government but the people controlling the people. 

As long as I have breath in my body, I own me. 

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 21:34 | 1289880 l1xx3r
l1xx3r's picture


Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:46 | 1288775 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

Put your penus project back in your pants. It's a complete fantasy created by deranged individuals.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:06 | 1288848 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

Sort of like the Free Market.

And alCIAda.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 19:30 | 1289388 TheTmfreak
TheTmfreak's picture

Hah. You're officially a fucking moron.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:06 | 1288845 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

How does Capitalism make the poor rich?  

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:22 | 1288912 tmosley
tmosley's picture

By allowing them to save the fruits of their labors, and even generate a return on them.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:36 | 1288963 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

How can they save the fruits of their labors when the OWNER of their labor keeps them?

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 18:57 | 1289260 FrankDrakman
FrankDrakman's picture

Seriously - are you retarded? You can't think of a single example from the last 200 years of someone who started with next to nothing, worked hard, and built up a fortune? Forget about new age tech guys like Jobs/Woz or Gates/Allen.. what about Hewlett and Packard? Or what about Andrew Carnegie - started off as a boy changing spools of thread, 12 hours a day, six days a week, and became the richest man in the world. 

On the distaff side - Oprah, born to a teenage welfare mother, raped at age nine, now a billionaire, or JK Rowling, who lived on welfare while she finished the first Harry Potter book.

There are millions of these stories. If you can't figure out cause and effect, you're an idiot.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 19:16 | 1289317 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

I don't let anecdotes overshadow how a system operates.  How many slaves become millionaires?

I asked a basic question, directly stated by the author:  how can the industrial little proto-capitalist sell the fruits of their labor to another (i.e., wage labor) and, simultaneously, keep it for themselves?

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 19:34 | 1289405 XPolemic
XPolemic's picture

There are millions of these stories. If you can't figure out cause and effect, you're an idiot.

Correlation is not causation. How about this:

Toyotomi Hideyoshi, born 1536  (before capitalism was even a word) into a peasant family, became supreme ruler of Japanese forces.

Zhu Yuanzhang, born into a peasant family so poor they had to give away seven of his siblings because they couldn't afford to feed them. Became Emperor of China (Ming Dynasty) in 1425, WITHOUT CAPITALISM EVER EXISTING.

Ivaylo the Cabbage, a peasant who lead a revolt and became king of Bulgaria in 1278. DID HE NEED CAPITALISM?

There are millions of these stories. If you can't figure out that correlation <> causation, you're an idiot.


Wed, 05/18/2011 - 19:32 | 1289397 TheTmfreak
TheTmfreak's picture

Better said that their work is their own. Their bodies are their own. What they produce with their body is theirs own to trade. If you work for someone, you trade your work for some other thing they give you. (gold, silver, paper, whatever the hell the value is)

People's failure to understand the basics of work and work relations blows my mind.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 22:58 | 1290169 technovelist
technovelist's picture


Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:18 | 1288679 Calmyourself
Calmyourself's picture

Yes I will envision that along with the cascading founts of skittles flying out your pollyanish pie hole..

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:20 | 1288682 tmosley
tmosley's picture

"without greed"

Guess there's no people then. Greed is the first thing we feel when we are born. You think a baby gives a fuck about anyone else? Everything we learn after that is to suppress that absolute greed so you can live with other people, but to get rid of it entirely will kill you.

Anarchocommunists are stupid, and WILL BE SHOT if they ever set foot on my property.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:22 | 1288689 l1xx3r
l1xx3r's picture

+999 gold

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:29 | 1288709 pan-the-ist
pan-the-ist's picture

This doesn't make any sense.  Sure, children are greedy, but then they become adults and aren't ruled by greed.  Were you born into poverty?

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:32 | 1288720 l1xx3r
l1xx3r's picture

So you are so perfect that you wouldn't steal bread if you were starving? Cause in communism there wasn't even bread to steal, because there was no benefit in making it.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:31 | 1288729 pan-the-ist
pan-the-ist's picture

No, but I am not motivated by greed. If I were poor, I certainly would be needy, but not necessarily greedy.

You're referring to Stalinism.  Stalinism isn't communism.  I described a utopia as a starting point, it isn't reality.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:36 | 1288744 l1xx3r
l1xx3r's picture

All forms of communism in the history of man has failed with many starving, and many killed for disagreeing with communism. Yet, capitalism has brought you the iPhone, the toilets and everything else (despite socialism) you take for granted everyday.

So the way I see it, you are an idiot unless you can actually make an argument for your stance. Which I have not seen yet.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:47 | 1289010 tmosley
tmosley's picture

That is a stupid point to make. We are talking about anarchocommunism. Not some dim-witted inhuman utopia.

There is exactly ZERO difference between "need" and "want". Everything we do in life is an economic decision. Anarcho-communists would tear down Maslow's pyramid claiming that if they did, everyone could eat, but much of those higher needs that are being fulfilled are going to feed those who are hungry, and they do so by producing so much that prices come down, and everyone can afford to eat.'s_hierarchy_of_needs

You fools look at primitive tribal societies and wish you lived there, until you realize that those people live short, brutal, painful lives that literally no-one wants to live. You decry that which gives you sustenance, and that which enriches all, while promoting that which destroys all.

You can dress up your little shit all you want by giving the same thing a billion different names, but the fact is that YOU ARE A MURDERER. Your ideology perverts and kills everything it touches. You look on the withered tree that you poisoned and plead that it wasn't what you wanted, but it is exactly the end point for your actions, no matter how many times you attempt to do the same thing. Every time you do it, you murder MILLIONS.

You didn't describe Utopia, you described the grave.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 20:47 | 1289666 pan-the-ist
pan-the-ist's picture

The key, I think, is abundance.  That's what really makes communism/anarchy a fantasy.  Reality is that we live in a world of limited resources and some have them and some don't.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 19:19 | 1289333 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

This is the giant con:

Capitalism feeds itself by making you greedy, and then their propagandists come along and tell you it's 'human nature' to care only about yourself.

'Human Nature' to a Capitalist reduces to one statement:  ME!  ME!  ME!

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 19:37 | 1289408 TheTmfreak
TheTmfreak's picture

Do you really think that any organism doesn't revolve their life around themselves or their posterior? You're statements are proof of the high level of intellectual decadence that exists in the "modern" world

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:37 | 1288748 Dollar Bill Hiccup
Dollar Bill Hiccup's picture

Would not such an action make you, yourself an anarchocommunist (the spelling on that pushes the limit) ?

You were much more creative with the door knob trick ...

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:24 | 1288929 tmosley
tmosley's picture

No. Anarchocommunists do not recognize the right to property, and will steal anything that is yours to support their own lives. They are savages by every description. Humans made into animals. They set foot on my property with the intention of stealing anything and everything. Or destroying what they can't steal. These are the fools you see in riots all over the world.

Humans have the right to self ownership, and the ownership of property. Those are the only two rights that are needed, as all others flow from those two. To take away one is to destroy the foundation of what makes us human.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 18:04 | 1289046 LMAO
LMAO's picture

@ tmosley

That Sir is confusing 

"Anarcho Communists do not recognize the right to property, and will steal anything that is yours to support their own lives"


You are referring to the group as being "the fools you see in riots all over the world" while I see it as an apt description that fits USSA's machinations to a t.

Anarcho Communists, both sides of the same coin?

They are both victim and perpetrator.



Wed, 05/18/2011 - 21:28 | 1289862 tmosley
tmosley's picture

There are parallels, but anarcho-communists don't believe in governments either.  I suppose that is a contradiction, as the refusal to believe in property rights would in fact allow for the rise of a large theft based organization.

Good analysis.  I learned something.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:16 | 1288873 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

What total bullshit.  It isn't natural to covet more than you need.  Stupid bullshit like that is learned.

There are many, many societies in which accumulation of useless shit was not the paramount aim.   Many actually DESTROY their surplus annually because remaining in harmony with nature and the planet was the chief virtue.

The fact that White Capitalists ran all over the world killing them doesn't make their history irrelevant.  

Only with the arrival of capitalism, and it's ambition to enslave man and nature to the God of Accumulation, that greed takes center stage.  Pure greed is pure Capitalism, so defenders of capitalism have to act like the first 5000 years of recorded history doesn't exist or isn't real.

And to think:  they do all of that unlearning simply to defend the landfill as a sacrosanct social institution!

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:39 | 1288980 tmosley
tmosley's picture

This is the dumbest sack of shit put into words that I have ever read.

Who the fuck is destroying their surplus, rather than saving for a rainy day. Capitalism isn't about accumulating "things", it is about FREEDOM.

Christ, look at the lives of savage races before the arrival of the whites, who practiced something resembling capitalism, while not fully understanding it. Go to wikipedia and look up "Flower Wars", and tell me how at peace those monsters were.

Every civilization that was destroyed by the arrival of whites was a victim of their own inability to recognize the rights of their own people, and the rights of others. The Aztecs, the North American Indians, and the Africans were destroyed and enslaved. The Chinese, the Indians, the Japanese all survived easily. Why? What is the difference? The Orientals recognized natural rights. They allowed their people to develop capital. They were able to specialize their labor force because of it. That is why they survived. The North American Indians were anarchocommunists for the most part, and their failure to recognize the white settler's rights to their own property lead to conflict. They stole goods and children, and killed those who resisted. Until the capital the settlers accumulated in the form of guns, horses, uniforms, and men to fill them came into play.

The Africans were similar, at least at first. Since they had immunity to the white men's disease, they were able to survive as a people, but their culture was lost. If they had recognized natural rights, they would have long ago built up great cities and adapted to the white's weapons, and kept them at bay, as the Chinese, Japanese, and Indians did.

The Aztecs recognized the right to property, and thus built up a great civilization. They DIDN'T recognize the right to self ownership, meaning people were taken from areas surrounding the cities to have their hearts torn out, and their bodies flung down the sides of pyramids like garbage. These HORRORS created such resentment, that the moment an opportunity came along in the form of Cortez' few men, horses, and cannon, the whole of the countryside rose up as one and threw them down.

You are a damned fool, and you can keep your ass off of my property.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 19:22 | 1289024 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

"Capitalism isn't about accumulating "things", it is about FREEDOM."  Good one.  I think it's about kitty cats, too.

You're right - profit has NOTHING to do with it.

Do you teach economics?

PS:  White Capitalists are the savages.  

PS PS:  When I come for your property, it will be with divisions.


Wed, 05/18/2011 - 21:33 | 1289871 tmosley
tmosley's picture

When I come for your property, it will be with divisions.

Yes, this is the true nature of these bastards.  Fucking thieves, every one of you.  You will by the bullets perforating your body that you don't even think that you own that you can't trample the rights of free men and live to tell the tale, not for long anyways.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 22:26 | 1290049 OrestesPenthilu...
OrestesPenthilusQuintard's picture

I didn't come to ZH and expect breathy college sophomores extolling the virtues of the organized Left.

"white capitalists are the savages".

I'll bet that plays really well in the Community College Humanities class.  Does the prof have a blazer with elbow patches?  How many Che Guevara Tshirts are in the class?  Are you the 'deep' guy at the kegger - proselytizing in the corner about hope and change?  I hope you're younger than 23 - if you're older than that - sorry.

Please.  Grow up and join the world.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 19:29 | 1289365 TheTmfreak
TheTmfreak's picture

I stand corrected. Changing..

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 21:40 | 1289912 l1xx3r
l1xx3r's picture

Its nice to see that logic and facts do work with some :) Thanks for renewing some of my faith in people.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:51 | 1289030 Silvarouvres
Silvarouvres's picture

What we should care about is the fact that we're borrowing $6 billion every business day


Incredible. So in one week, the US is borrowing the equivalent of:

-60 miles of maglev track (monday)
-1 Nimitz class aircraft carrier (tuesday)
-30 Boeing 787 airliners (wednesday)
-3 Space Shuttles (thursday)
-4.5 800MW Nuclear Power Plants (friday)

But I'm sure the current allocation of that weekly total does create more jobs


Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:01 | 1288330 Vergeltung
Vergeltung's picture

sobering read.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:02 | 1288334 tpberg7
tpberg7's picture

Roach Hotel Bitchez!

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:06 | 1288344 Go4er
Go4er's picture

Sounds like a good idea!

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:52 | 1288543 Zero Govt
Zero Govt's picture

what the Tobin Tax?'s got to be wrong, the worst Prime Minister in British history, Gordon 'always wrong' Brown, proposed it a few years ago which guarantees its stupidty

...every Keynsians favourite economist, er that'll be John Maynard Keynes then, advocated stimulus with tax cuts... so even he of the socialists economic script writer was against raising taxes

Here's a solution: everyone stop paying taxes, Govt collapses within 2 weeks with all the debt they ran up... problem (budget issue) solved once and for all and we can all go home richer

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:19 | 1288889 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

The Tobin tax is the crazy idea that says that the banker-gangsters who used derivatives to detonate the economy should pay a tax on their turnover.

But most people here don't think banker-gangsters should be taxed at all.  Instead, they advocate closing libraries and firing garbage collectors.

After all, they aren't as important as a banker-gangsters drug habit.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:09 | 1288347 wang
wang's picture

I am pleased that someone out there is capturing Bloomberg subscription content - Mr. Keene (are you reading this Mr. K?) would have a far larger audience if they took that stupid paywall down.  While far from perfect it is the best (US based) financial TV out there.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:16 | 1288423 Iceobar
Iceobar's picture's free

go to on live "tv" at the top...Been there for a long time

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:04 | 1288348 Pepe
Pepe's picture

Well, when you are drowning desperate moves are a matter of survival.However survival is not guaranteed 

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:08 | 1288354 RobotTrader
RobotTrader's picture

Funny how the market is completely laughing at these so called "experts".

Market is shrugging off the debt ceiling, or just plain simply ignoring it.

Let me check my Bloomberg, just one minute......


10-yr. yield is still at 3.1%, even though we have $14 trillion in debts.

And just think, back in 1980 we had 16% yields, and the U.S. debt was just barely over $1 trillion and people were freaking out.

Clearly, the market has spoken.


Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:13 | 1288381 Internet Tough Guy
Internet Tough Guy's picture

Oil over 101. Commodities skying. LOL. You are the perfect fade, momo. Go buy some more TZOO; you must be puking up blood! Proof once again that 'things' rule over paper.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:56 | 1288565 hambone
hambone's picture

C'mon - Robo is correct in that the bond market as an idicator of anything is dead.  The Fed, PD's, CB's, et al. will ensure nobody actually pays real risk adjusted rates.  Not Greece, not Italy, not Spain, not America, not Japan, not TBTF banks, TBTF corporations.  They will all collude to buy each others or their own T's / bonds rather than allow the secondary market to enforce budget discipline.  Shorting T's seems childishly naive or idealistic.  The open market is not coming back.  T's will yield what they say they will yield.

They will print.  The money will become worth less, commodities will become worth more.  Faber, Rogers own this.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:32 | 1288946 ivana
ivana's picture

Can agree with you to some point but hope you agree that FINAL GOAL OF THE GREAT GAME is not to have/exchange some bs bonds, papers, fiat etc ... goal is to conquer & expropriate REAL ASSETS. Like those which greek gov must sell now below price. That doesn't come easy ... whole country must be brought to edge of collapse and over for that to happen.

Consequently - see greek yields and how they got there

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 18:08 | 1289088 hambone
hambone's picture

Seems as good a rationale as any...personally, I really don't know if there is a "goal" to any of this other than just to keep the game going but what you propose makes sense.

Thu, 05/19/2011 - 09:44 | 1291072 Ponzi Unit
Ponzi Unit's picture

Yes, fiat monetary and debt regimes ruled by fiat.

In Bizarro world, economic laws are suspended -- but for how long?

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:15 | 1288412 Gubbmint Cheese
Gubbmint Cheese's picture

You know very well the market doesn't care about this stuff.. until the very moment it does.

THAT'S when things get ugly.


Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:28 | 1288464 ivana
ivana's picture

For all junkies, the worst moment is entering rehab ... later is easier. Did you see Nov-Dec yields after banksters announced buying of bonds?

Now chairsatan is compensating low yields with rising USD buying time and printing more for banktupt gov ... later comes real yield fireworks. Which, for USA , may top at 5-6-7% ? God knows where. Anywhere it tops - it will be fin armagedon. For rest of world it will be like USA+10% yields.

I guess USA10y bond > 6%

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 18:23 | 1289137 suldog
suldog's picture

Not a market, Robo.  Go back and listen to the part about rigged Roach Motels.

Thu, 05/19/2011 - 08:58 | 1290872 cranky-old-geezer
cranky-old-geezer's picture

Clearly, the market has spoken.

Clearly, the Fed has spoken.

Fixed it.

In 1980 the Fed was (more or less) carrying out its purpose, not buying treasury debt, preventing inflation, maintaining the value of the dollar. It's why interest rates were 16%.

Today the Fed has abandoned its purpose.  Today the Fed is buying Treasury debt to keep  prices high and yields low, along with buying worthless trash from insolvent TBTF banks to keep them afloat, along with bying stocks via proxy to pump stocks up.  In the process the Fed is causing monetary inflation and weakening the dollar. 

Instead of 16% interest rates, we now have  16% monetary inflation.

Like Wall Street, RoboTard loves watching  stocks levitating while ignoring the 16% monetary inflation time bomb quietly ticking away in the corner.

Apparently RoboTard lives in his mother's basement and doesn't have a car.  It appears he doesn't have to buy food, fuel, electricity, water, etc, like the rest of us do.  He can enjoy his stock profits without paying the inflationary cost of it.

When the dollar eventually collapses and RoboTard sees the S&P rocket to 5,000, he'll probably think he's rich.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:05 | 1288355 Sutton
Sutton's picture

The Last thing we need is a transaction tax.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:10 | 1288362 Go4er
Go4er's picture

I may have missed something, but I thought the whole point was to tax not "us" but the high frequency trades or the like...

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:15 | 1288387 Saxxon
Saxxon's picture

Go4er; it simply kills day-traders, some of whom run maybe a hundred trades a day.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:16 | 1288395 Go4er
Go4er's picture

Thank you

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:21 | 1288446 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

The point is, it would be a small transaction tax (i.e. a few pennies a trade) so the typical daytrader would pay a few dollars per day but the HFT guys would pay a few million dollars per day.

All in all, a magnificent idea. Which will never happen, for obvious reasons.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:35 | 1288508 spartan117
spartan117's picture

You already get taxed on closing transactions via the SEC Section 31 fee and FINRA Trading Activity Fee, and the brand spanking new Options Regulatory Fee.  Why do we need more "fees"?

The more tax our government gets, the more they spend.  Cut spending to the bone!  No more taxes!

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 19:26 | 1288932 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

No - you mean cut spending to the bone for people who work for a living.  Keep the cash rolling in for those poor banker-gangsters.

I pay tax when I buy a newspaper or falafal, yet banker-gangsters think they're immune to taxes on the pieces of paper that caused the meltdown.

It's priceless to see unadulterated greed try to present itself as something logical and above-the-fray.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:19 | 1288434 MurderNeverWasLove
MurderNeverWasLove's picture

I would say it should be the first AND last thing we need.

But the old code has to go. Burn that shit and kick some tax lawyers to the curb.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:24 | 1288921 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

ANYONE who talks about austerity and says we don't need a turnover tax on the QUADRILLIONS in untaxed, unregulated derivatives turnover simply has lost all perspective.  Only one thing matters:  MY MONEY!  

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:56 | 1289038 Hacksaw
Hacksaw's picture

I'm sure that's what they told you shills to say, but I would love to see a transaction tax instituted. It would kill several birds with the same stone.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:08 | 1288364 MurderNeverWasLove
MurderNeverWasLove's picture

"Secondly, Wall Street needs to have a transaction tax. I know they won't like it. A tax on every trade, a small amount, would go a long way to putting money in the coffers."


No.  A fiat/transaction fee to replace all other taxes at every level.

Just piling on doesn't help regular people at all.  If a transaction-based tax is what it should be, then it should be good enough for everyone.

So I still have to pay 8+% tax on a loaf of bread, but a bankster will only pay a really tiny sub-penny percentage?  Screw that.

Grow the tax base to encompass the $3Q transacted every year, and set the fee that would do the trick.  I figure .49% until the national debt is retired.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:25 | 1288465 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Transaction taxes (aka excise taxes) are a wonderful idea because they are consistent with the three pillars of Freedom (Life, Liberty, Property).

-- they can be legally and ethically avoided

-- they aren't income taxes (which are a tax on your livelihood, i.e., your liberty is degraded because you are now a slave to the State)

-- they aren't property taxes (which undermine your property rights by making the State the ultimate property owner)

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:37 | 1288738 DoChenRollingBearing
DoChenRollingBearing's picture

+ 100

Ending the Income Tax would be a great idea.  Also property taxes.

But, that will not happen, because taxes on the poor, relatively speaking, would go up.  So, a no go.  Pity.

Mon, 05/23/2011 - 15:01 | 1302649 MurderNeverWasLove
MurderNeverWasLove's picture

I doubt that an excise of only .49% would, in fact, be more than the poor pay now.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:10 | 1288366 rookie
rookie's picture

here they go on limiting access to retirement accounts. . .



Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:18 | 1288413 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

First they will do this then they will nationalize them. Baby steps. Thta's how they take everything from you. Including what little freedom you have left.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:16 | 1288415 Saxxon
Saxxon's picture

Kohl is a lapdog.  Even his ass-sucking face offends.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:16 | 1288417 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

“During these difficult economic times, we are increasingly seeing 401(k) funds being treated as rainy day funds,” Senator Herb Kohl, a Wisconsin Democrat, said in a statement obtained by Bloomberg News. “A 401(k) savings account should not be used as a piggy bank for revolving loans.”

he can say that with a straight face? the hypocrisy.

Thu, 05/19/2011 - 09:08 | 1290919 cranky-old-geezer
cranky-old-geezer's picture

“A 401(k) savings account should not be used as a piggy bank for revolving loans.”

"Leave your 401k alone so WE (congress) can use it as OUR piggy bank."

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:13 | 1288379 Dr. Engali
Dr. Engali's picture

Is it not possible to ever talk about real spending cuts? Not just cuts in spending growth ? All they ever want to do is tax ,tax, and tax some more.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:27 | 1288462 centerline
centerline's picture

Well, it is ironic that either way the system is doomed.

What too many people around here seem to forget from time to time (myself included) is that the idiots in charge really dont have a clue about what money really is.  How is comes to be.  The impossible math involved.

At some point, the government is going to get really desperate.  And taxes are just the tip of the iceberg.  Fees, service cuts, program terminations, you name it.  All coming soon enough.  Officials will be bumped out of office and replaced by people who just come after J6P through some other oriface.  All of which is deflationary of course.  Through all the madness though, the cry for inflation will be generated.  The Fed will turn on the printing presses again full-throttle, and Shazam... Zimbabwefication magic!  Some might postulate they could just keep us on the rails for awhile - but I doubt it.  The stresses in the markets are unlikely to have enough for another go round.  As does the dollar, home values, unemployment, etc.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:14 | 1288382 youngman
youngman's picture

A transation tax might stop the HFT´s...but I would bet they get an exemption for fast trades....or a trade that is never executed...or has to last more than a milli second...what ever..they will just charge the little guy...but talk about would slow things down a bit..daytraders go bye bye

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:28 | 1288942 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture


OMG - how will the world function?  Can the planet continue spinning on its axis without the valuable work these parasites do?

Mon, 05/23/2011 - 15:09 | 1302667 MurderNeverWasLove
MurderNeverWasLove's picture

I'm not a trader, but if a tax only occurs when transferring funds in/out of an account, I wouldn't mind that, I don't think.  If you look at the M*V side, stocks are actually a small slice of the money moving around in the world.

What data I've found is published by the BIS:

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:14 | 1288385 GeneMarchbanks
GeneMarchbanks's picture


Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:16 | 1288393 alangreedspank
alangreedspank's picture

Ah yes. A tax fixing our problems. Never tought I'd read that on Zero Hedge.


Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:58 | 1288603 Zero Govt
Zero Govt's picture

+  Yep, sad day ...and next, we need a Sales Tax ..and next, we need a walking in the park tax

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:32 | 1288947 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

AUSTERITY for everyone*


*Just not for banker-gangsters who detonated the economy with their crooked derivatives trade.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:32 | 1288962 alangreedspank
alangreedspank's picture


With the full backstopping of the government that already has too much power. You need t get smarter than just pushing for a new tax to fix these problems.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:39 | 1288979 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

I'm not saying it's the only solution.  Hell, we can end about 6 or 7 wars, too.

I'm simply saying this is an obvious solution, and the only people opposed to it do so on completely illegitimate grounds that goes something like this.  "We shouldn't tax derivatives turnover because I DON'T WANNA PAY and I'm VERY, VERY important."

I say fuck taxing them; abolish them all together.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:16 | 1288399 minsky4ever
minsky4ever's picture

The Dems need to dig in their heels: demand a Tobin tax, revoke the Bush tax cuts, or tax hedge fund managers' income as income instead of as capital gains. There's no need to attack Social Security, either. Eliminate or raise the income cutoff substantially and the system fixes itself. Unmitigated selfishness on the part of rich arrogant thieves will only turn this country into a third world garbage heap. In Bush II's words that wouldn't be bad if he could be the dictator, but it ain't too pretty for the rest of us.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:39 | 1288512 Hugh G Rection
Hugh G Rection's picture



Thats all we need to do is rally behind the nobility of the "democratic" party....


Bush was a corrupt asshole, if you believe in 0bama and the establishment left, then you're an asshole too.


Both sides are run by the elite. Which is why Kuchinich and Ron Paul will never get nominated.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:13 | 1288400 skipjack
skipjack's picture

Fuck tax increases.   They can balance the budget with spending cuts.  Roll the government back to 1996 (Bill Clinton days, the Dems should go for that. ) and the job is about done.  I'm not paying a penny more unless some very significant spending cuts occur.  I refuse to give more money to Morgan Stanley wives.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:52 | 1288799 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

Fuck tax increases

  • Cut Government: (essential/non essential mouth breathers)
  • Roll back IRS tax codes.
Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:30 | 1288952 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

Well, by NOT endorsing a Tobin tax you're giving more money to the Morgan Stanley wives.  It's just that you also want to destroy libraries, too.

Good job.

Thu, 05/19/2011 - 03:34 | 1290534 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

FYI:  Andrew Carnegie built a large amount of "Public" Libraries...Not bad for a rich, decadent Capitalist!  Why do you have such a hard-on for increasing the size of the Leviathan Govt?  If you feel the Govt is too small, I'm sure that the IRS/Treasury will gladly take any and all donations you send their way.  Please feel free to pay my way while you're at it.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:18 | 1288408 XenoFrog
XenoFrog's picture

3 cents a trade seems fair. Sucks to be a HFT Computer owner. It would not only generate revenue, but also promote market stability. Double win!

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:27 | 1288463 legal eagle
legal eagle's picture

Would the Fed, as buyer of last resort, get an exemption from the tax?  Or, would the taxpayer fund the that a tautology?

Mon, 05/23/2011 - 15:28 | 1302726 MurderNeverWasLove
MurderNeverWasLove's picture

My version of this Tobin scheme I call the Fiat Fee, and Fedwire becomes where a large portion of the fees are collected.

If I initiate a transaction, and pay a fee for my use of fiat, whoever I pay that to must also forward that fee when deposited, or cleared through a bank or whatever.  So you have Fedwire, SWIFT, DTCC and the like who are actually remitting to the treasury.  No one else needs to deal with the taxman, because nearly all funds that flow are going to end up on some fat pipe in the monetary infrastructure.

And cash is pre-paid at its velocity times the fee, so all cash transactions (until re-deposited somewhere) are pre-paid.  This captures the black and grey markets fairly handily.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:20 | 1288425 Go4er
Go4er's picture

Food for thought. The people here are very passionate about the future. Also, I would venture to say that the aforementioned group has an I.Q. higher than the general population. So... It seems plausible to me that this group should be able to pool there skills and being about some type of positive action. Whether it be political or financial such as starting a very successful business venture...Just a thought...

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:22 | 1288433 oddjob
oddjob's picture

Trotting out Fossils for solutions has always worked in the past.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:24 | 1288436 ussa
ussa's picture

Wow surprising that the clown Stockman wants a tax increase. 

one could pay off all of the US Treasury debt (and most household sector debt) in short order with a 100% reserve requirement on all fractional reserve entities.    This type of monetary reform could save $400+bn/ year in interest payments or greater than 2.5% of GDP. 

If other industrialized countries provide healthcare at 10% of GDP with better outcomes and universal care versus the US at 18%, 15% uninsured, and among the lowest in the OECD for outcomes, one could easily conceive slamming down future healthcare liabilities. 

We know that to accomplish our common defense needs we probably need to spend less than 2.5% of GDP versus the $1 trillion defense related today or 6+% of GDP .  Again, we spend much more than really necessary.

 Kotlikoff has already devised these types of solutions, but the real endgame is debt slavery, wealth transfer and fascist state control.

A tobin tax?  Stockman and his ilk are there only to distract and contribute to the divide and conquer strategy being waged against the 6bn people in the world who are being slammed by about 1,000,000 people.


Mon, 05/23/2011 - 15:37 | 1302754 MurderNeverWasLove
MurderNeverWasLove's picture

I don't know what the hell Stockman might want, but unless it is a complete replacement of all other forms of taxation, I would be against it.


If, however, it is the standard fee that everyone pays to transact within the fiat USD economy, then I am wholeheartedly for it.

And talking that snapshot BS guide of GDP for everything. . .  The economy has never stayed still long enough to measure it in that way.  We would be better to have a single, fractional percentage levied on every dollar transacted, then we are talking a tax base of $3+ Quadrillion in a year, rather than the measly, snapshot view of $14Trillion in growth over a given year.

If you do the math, you can tell that the ROI for the US economy is teeny tiny after the tax accountants and lawyers have gotten through with their magic.

When nothing is exempt, and everything is assessed the same, then the IRS and the tax wizards can file unemployment or whatever.  Much rather have them on food stamps than on some poor businessman's ass.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:22 | 1288448 babylon15
babylon15's picture

A transaction tax is a terrible idea. Markets would adapt immediately so that:

1. Spreads would increase by 1000% or more (an average 0.01 spread on a $40 stock is 0.025%. The new spread would become 0.25%, or 5x the average daily return of the Dow since 1880. Merely buying in and out would cost 0.50% for the most liquid stocks. For less liquid stocks, spreads would be several percent.

2. Wall Street profits would be commission-based once again since the spread would become too difficult to earn. Get ready to bend over for 8% roundtrip commissions + 0.50% spread. Every trade starts you -8.5% in the hole just for opening up a position in anything.

3. Volatility would skyrocket. If you think it's a casino now, wait until everyone is afraid to trade because the spread and commission are too hard to overcome.

4. Liquidity would collapse. Although many HFTs do not provide any real liquidity in any meaningful sense, many other strategies do provide liquidity. It's true that liquidity and volume are not synonymous - but liquidity in a broader sense is resistance to price movements in either direction.

Finally, a transaction tax doesn't address the real problem with the markets, which is not HFT. The real problem is central banks pumping in trillions of dollars of fake zero percent interest money to boost prices. The real problem is Google selling $3 billion in zero percent bonds because it doesn't want to pay 1 cent in taxes on its $37 billion offshore cash warchest.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:39 | 1288991 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

Cry me a river.  You sound like Geithner talking about the debt ceiling.

The effects on the REAL WORLD would be insignificant.  The only people affected would be the banker-gangsters who don't do anything besides suck the blood of others.  

So AT LEAST let them pay a tax for doing so at 100000x leverage.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 19:21 | 1289335 CreditCrumbs
CreditCrumbs's picture

Your arguments do not hold water. Transaction tax makes investors more careful about their decision in buying or selling assets. This will bring back long term investing. Short-termism is the disease where all other problems we have currently sprung up. 

Mon, 05/23/2011 - 15:45 | 1302790 MurderNeverWasLove
MurderNeverWasLove's picture

1. Spreads would increase -- Not really necessary.  A little spread increase might engender a bit more prudence.  But I would let most of the trading be without fee.  If you want to move your gains somewhere useful, that would suffice, IMO.

2. See #1

3. I don't see it.  When capital gains taxes are suddenly only .49%, wouldn't that be worth risking a bit of the old volatility?

4.  Liquidity would collapse?  Well, where have we heard that old song and dance before?

5.  I don't think a fiat fee should be designed for any purpose whatsoever with regards to social or market engineering. Put everything on the same playing field, whether it be coke, hookers, bread, or AAPL.  And when GOOG doesn't want to play by the no-income-tax, no-property-tax, no-sales-tax, no-capital-gains tax game, they may freely move that money wherever they'd like, I'd say.  I would guess that much capital would be repatriated once the IRS is gone.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:22 | 1288450 MrBinkeyWhat
MrBinkeyWhat's picture

Pass out the Soma. Nothing to see here. Move along. Bitchez ( ;-) )/Sarc

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:25 | 1288453 BT310
BT310's picture

Time for the opposition to play the liquidity card.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:27 | 1288459 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

Not impressed with Stockman at all. He acts like he doesn't bear any responsibility starting this whole mess with his huge budgets and massive deficits under Reagan. Now he has all the answers? Yeah, right. Fuck him.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:50 | 1288564 lieutenantjohnchard
lieutenantjohnchard's picture

i remember the debate when he was reagan's omb director. the goal was to couple tax cuts with spending cuts to offset each other. the tax cuts went through but the spending cuts never came. can't really blame him for congress passing and reagan signing off on the budget increases. tried to grow the country out of the deficits but the spending outpaced the cuts. same as it ever was.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:01 | 1288823 Catullus
Catullus's picture

I see you've never actually read David stockman's book or listened to him actually speak. I suppose you know every conversation ever had in the Reagan administration. And you know which side he fell on. And you know that he has been saying for years that Reagan never cut spending.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 18:21 | 1289128 Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

So you're saying none of it was his responsibilty as budget director? Nice deflection on the blame game. And I guess you also fall into the Dick Cheney "deficits don't matter" school of thinking?

"President Jimmy Carter's last signed and executed fiscal year budget results ended with a $79.0 billion budget deficit, ending within the period of David Stockman's and Ronald Reagan's first year in office, on October 1, 1981, and provided the benchmark of where the national debt stood at the beginning of the Reagan administration. The gross federal national debt had just climbed to the $1.0 trillion level in October 1981 ($998 billion on 30 September 1981), which was the cumulative fiscal budget results of 205 years as a nation (1776–1981). Four and a half years into the Reagan administration, upon Stockman's resignation at the OMB in August 1985, the gross federal debt level had nearly doubled with the national debt standing at $1.8 trillion on 9 September 1985. Stockman's OMB work within the administration in 1981 up to August was dedicated to negotiating with the Senate and House on the next fiscal year's budget, executed later in the fall of 1985, which resulted in the national debt reaching $2.1 trillion at fiscal year end 30 September 1986 and reaching $2.6 trillion at fiscal year end 30 September 1988."

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:32 | 1288484 Eireann go Brach
Eireann go Brach's picture

The economy is a big roach motel run by fucking cockroaches who are in turn led by the biggest cockroach in chief himself Chameleon Obama

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:50 | 1288549 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture

Obama is Bush is Clinton is Bush.. there is NO! difference!

LOBBY WHORES! one and all!

The Lobby Rules!

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:32 | 1288496 AldoHux_IV
AldoHux_IV's picture

End central banking which will dissolve some some $9trln in useless paper, reform the treasury, and reform the democratic process in this country.

Nothing will happen until it's too late however.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:38 | 1288515 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture

Flat tax.. no loop holes.. Oops! thats to, too hard becuase the Big! NO! HUGE!! Money Lobby's.. ALL the Lobby's will band together to Block a Flat Tax..


Everyone Pays exactly the same and no deductions! NONE!


No Body wants that! everyone is to busy being a scumbag for their own benefit!

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:46 | 1288535 spartan117
spartan117's picture

Envision a mob of fat, bald, and overworked CPAs rioting in DC.  Not pretty.  It would take an army (10-20) mobile infantry girl-scouts to quell the uprising. 

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:48 | 1288541 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture

they should have gotten a real job other than sucking the blood of others! fuck them and the Tax Esquires too!


If it were my Country I would have them rounded up and shot on site! for Treason against their fellow Americans!

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:43 | 1288536 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture

and an end to all subsidies! ALL! Subsidies!

I just paid for every things and then some!

Flat Tax and NO! Subisidies!! Tax Trough Closed!

Bailout Monies are 10% in a 1st position annual. if they can Not afford it it rolls and compunds until they can afford it! fuck this 0% bullshit..


The Poor people of this Country and the Middle / Unions of this Country are NOT! Breaking this Country..


The RICH LOBBY that FUCKS EVERYONE with Tax Loop Holes and Subsidies! ARE the Welfare that needs to be stoped!


Wake the Fuck up! Just becuase the Catch Phrases tested well and you like the way the words make you feel.. dont change the facts! wakie! wakie!!

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:13 | 1288877 gorillaonyourback
gorillaonyourback's picture

i agree

Mon, 05/23/2011 - 15:47 | 1302799 MurderNeverWasLove
MurderNeverWasLove's picture

I'd take a flat tax if it replaced all the others, and I wouldn't have to report anything to anyone.

That's why a fiat fee is better (and flatter) than a flat tax.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:39 | 1288520 Use of Weapons
Use of Weapons's picture

What were the last two words of the presenter's spiel?

I heard surveillance mente (?) but I'm not good on American accents. Anyone want to enlighten me?

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:37 | 1288746 knowless
knowless's picture

surveillance midday, i have no idea what that means however.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:52 | 1288560 malek
malek's picture

I do like Stockman, but please:

Reagan's $1 trillion 1980 dollars are about $8 trillion of today's dollars if adjusted by the real inflation (SGS even says $9.7 trillion).
Or in other words today's $14 trillion equal about $1.75 trillion in 1980.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:24 | 1288704 spartan117
spartan117's picture

To be fair, we would need to adjust GDP numbers - that's why I think it's relevant to give more credence to the GDP/Debt % number.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:58 | 1288563 MarketFox
MarketFox's picture

How in the hell can somebody this stupid get on TV .....


A transaction tax would simply be passed on....and the marketmaking function would be left alone free of any tax....


In other words this would not be a tax that the banks would pay one penny of.....just the public.....

The marketmaking function is owned by the banks whereby the banks would be exempt from the tax.....

Seeing how the market is headed towards 5000......a further lack of liquidity would hasten the fall.....and then keep the fall Japan.....


This guy has got to be working for somebody......

Wonder who it is.....

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:18 | 1288664 aerojet
aerojet's picture

The logic is that the retail investor is all but gone already, so the only ones left to pay a fee are the robotraders, which would effectively shut them down, which is what is badly needed in order to restore any retail confidence in the rigged game.  If Dow 5000 is what results, then I argue that's a good thing and that the markets would finally reflect reality and not the la la land we've been in for three years now.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:48 | 1289005 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

This is truly a pathetic defense.  It's like listening to why AIG had to get bailed out.

You banker-gangsters are so self-important, and yet, if you fell off the earth tomorrow nobody'd notice.  

Thu, 05/19/2011 - 03:42 | 1290536 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

You sound a lot like Ted Kacynzski, when are you gonna release your manifesto and implement your "final solution?"

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 18:26 | 1289122 Hacksaw
Hacksaw's picture

Passed on to whom? I guess the "funds" could pass it on to their customers by upping their fees but we already know their customers are chumps anyway and deserve whatever screwing they get. Maybe the passive investor would have to handle their own money, what a terrible world that would be. Some Harvard educated crack head couldn't pay for all his drugs by losing other people's money.

Mon, 05/23/2011 - 15:52 | 1302821 MurderNeverWasLove
MurderNeverWasLove's picture

The point of a transaction-based tax is that it is passed on, but up the pyramid, rather than down.

When I pay my .02 on a loaf of bread, I'm done.  Now the grocer and his affiliates have to figure out how to not pass that fee on up the slope.  The grocer doesn't have anything to pass on to the consumer, because the consumer (me) already paid the fee, get it?  These fees are siphoned off at the interbank transfer systems, like the ones run by the Fed and SWIFT.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:53 | 1288575 BetweenThe Coasts
BetweenThe Coasts's picture

Gong Show Bitchez!

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:55 | 1288590 Missiondweller
Missiondweller's picture

the difference beteween the Reagan and Obama deficits?


I believe Reagan's was 6% GDP vs 11% GDP for Obama. That difference will compound relentlessly.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 15:56 | 1288596 mayhem_korner
mayhem_korner's picture

Raise taxes = accelerated economic implosion

Austerity = yields to the moon, housing market collapse, Dow to 9000

QEn = hyperinflationary depression, nomadic looting

Cut Entitlements = mother of all blue-hair riots

Frog is simmering....

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:02 | 1288623 AgShaman
AgShaman's picture

I wonder if I could pay my taxes off in un-used Dave and Buster's credits....

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:08 | 1288633 PulauHantu29
PulauHantu29's picture

'Monetary Roach Hotel'

I like this guy.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:12 | 1288648 wilburpup
wilburpup's picture

That's Roach MOTEL.  USSA can't afford a hotel.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:22 | 1288692 longjohnshorts
longjohnshorts's picture

David Stockman ... Stockman ... hmm ... didn't he do something once ... hmm ... rings some kinda bell but can't quite place him.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 16:27 | 1288717 dexter_morgan
dexter_morgan's picture

Yeah......taxes are the problem, NOT what is the magic tax number to solve all the problems eventually, 100%?

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:45 | 1288999 downwiththebanks
downwiththebanks's picture

Banker-gangsters are the problem.

Make them pay - especially for the privilege of blowing up the economy using 10000x levered derivatives.

No more free lunches for parasites.  You either pay, or you die.  

The world doesn't give a shit either way, really, since both are net goods.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:00 | 1288818 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

At some point, this administration is going to have to admit their host is on life support. One more incision, the host may flat-line.

Wed, 05/18/2011 - 17:02 | 1288826 dexter_morgan
dexter_morgan's picture

"I think bring the tax base or have new tax revenue sources.  We are in a stage where I think a tax on imported oil might be one way to get two birds with one stone."

Statements like this make Ricky on TPB's sound smart (his version - yeah man, it's like gettin 2 birds stoned at once)

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!