Obama jut put a 117 billion $ tax on NYC

Not just NYC.

bob yes it is almost all gonna come from NYC, huge implications.

Did you even read what is going to happen? It is a tax on borrowing funds. The cost of this will just be pushed to the customer.

you ever take econ??

LMAO. and the diff btwn tax and increasing fed funds rate? Obamie wants the 49 other states to think he gave it up the arse to the bnkers. he he he... what a pandering fool.

Yes. I am not saying it is good but it is all the big/top banks. How is it only bad for NYC?

By Tax do you mean that he is recovering the funds of American tax payers who bailed out the Bankers who ripped off the entire life savings of Americans then got a tax payer funded bail out handed to them by the previous Republican administrations so they could then pay themselves huge bonuses with the money of the very people they ripped off?

More Republican BULL SHIT.

For once you Republicans should just be honest.

You guys whould say "Hey we ripped off the American people because we were deregulated and it was "legal" to rip them off. We gamed the system and then the Republican adminsitration who allowed us to rip people off, bailed us out and gave us more of the American citizens money. This was "legal" due to the completely moronic policies that my party passed so we shouldnt be taxed on the immoral gains."

Funds used to bail out the banks have not been lost. Funds used to bail out the automakers have.

petrfitz, thanks for more partisan insanity.

This is not a tax on bonus. The story has been mis-reported.

petrfitz first off i am not even a republican and I agree with you that it is money due. But the point is that this is money that is coming from NYC and it will effect the RE market here. stick with the topic

The money was ripped off by the bankers in NYC. IT SHOULD BE TAKEN BACK REGARDLESS OF WHERE IT WAS STOLEN.

It is a $1500 tax on every 1 million borrowed for lending purposes. I guess the gov't is hoping that smaller banks won't have this fee, will offer cheaper loans, big banks won't want to lose the competitive advantage, will eat the fee and lower employee pay to make up for it.

Doesn't sound likely.

samadams, don't you think you should THINK before calling people names given you were wrong on this the other night. what a maroon.

Michael Goodwin had an article the other day about how Obama hates NY. His health care "reform" will kill NY's budget, the stupidity of having the terrorist trials here, and his efforts against the finance industry are all anti-NY. Schumer is selling us out so he can be majority leader, and Gillibrand is an empty suit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/15/us/15tax.html?src=sch&pagewanted=all

According to the official, the taxable assets would exclude what is known as a bank’s tier one capital — its core finances, which include common and preferred stock, disclosed reserves and retained earnings. The tax also would not apply to a bank’s insured deposits from savers, for which banks already pay a fee to the Federal Deposit Insurance

The administration’s objective in excluding a bank’s equity and insured deposits is to tax just the holdings that relate to risk-taking.

---------------------------------------------------------------
So therefore if the banks downsize, split into seperate companies or change the mixture of their business, we've reduced systemic rsik, increased competition and everyone is better off. This is only a tax if Wall Street mega-banks refuse to adapt.

http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/01/14/why-the-bank-tax-is-necessary/

It seems pretty obvious at this point that the arguments against the tax are very weak indeed. Jamie Dimon, for instance, has complained that “using tax policy to punish people is a bad idea” — but he’s going to have to spell out his thesis a lot more clearly than that before he gets anybody but the most knee-jerk anti-tax Republicans on his side. (He’s also damaging his chances of ever becoming Treasury secretary, which I’m happy about: the last thing we need is another Treasury secretary coming straight into the office from the CEO position at a major Wall Street bank.)

The only thing I’m mildly worried about is that the fee is large enough to be passed on to consumers, but small enough that they won’t react by moving their money to a smaller bank. My guess is though that the big banks are maximizing the fees they charge already. Might they lend a little less? That’s possible — but, on the other hand, maybe the fee will force them to lend a little more, and hold less money in cash.

Overall, any harm done by this tax will be minimal, while the benefit is likely to reach a good $100 billion or so. I call that a no-brainer.

Riversider were you worried about consumers when the republican deregulated Wall STreet was stealing every last cent of savings, as well as, the roof over their heads by selling knowingly bad products, making derivatives of them then betting against them?

Oh yeah dont hurt the consumers that we just robbed of every last cent!

Citibank, was headed by bob Rubin a Democrat. Wall Street contributes large sums of money to Democrats. Wall Street s largely run by Democrats.

Obama will make sure the banks have to eat this one

Riversider - you are a tool. Continue to pass the buck! What a load of shit.

Do you also think that 9/11 didnt happen on the Republicans watch?

Your policies caused this, your adminsitration allowed it to happen. Take credit for what you have done.

Perfitz, for the record, Glass Steagall was repealed in 1999 under Clinton, though the both the houses of Congress had a majortiy of republicans. So I guess both parties had a hand in this mess.

samadams, somewhereelse, bueller, bueller??

mets2009 - who wrote the act that appealed Glass Steigal? Amazing how many republicans "dont know this" or "forgot"

Who wrote the act that repealed Glass Steigal?

What were the votes on the act?

Where there enough votes to make this act vetod proof.

I bet you dont amswer ANY of these questions.

Is that Steigal or Seagal? Steven Seagal is my guess. He is one great action hero.

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), is an act of the 106th United States Republican Majority Controlled Congress (1999-2001) which repealed part of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, opening up the market among banking companies, securities companies and insurance companies.

Respective versions of the legislation were introduced in the U.S. Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the U.S. House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa). The third lawmaker associated with the bill was Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R-Virginia), Chairman of the House Commerce Committee from 1995 to 2001.

The House passed its version of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 on July 1st by a partisan vote of 343-86 (|Republicans 205–16; Democrats 138–69; Independent/Socialist 0–1),two months after the Senate had already passed its version of the bill on May 6th by a much-narrower 54–44 vote along basically-partisan lines (53 Republicans and one Democrat in favor; 44 Democrats opposed).

This legislation (whose voting margins would easily have overcome any Presidential veto) was signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.

So much for knowing ANY facts.

"Michael Goodwin had an article the other day about how Obama hates NY."

You've got to be kidding. He went to Columbia.

To Bill Clinton's credit, he was pro free-trade. Supporting Glass Stegal was in keeping with his philosophy. Repealing Glass Stegal seemed right at the time. There was huge fear that American Banks would lose out to European & Japanese rivals who didn't have the Glass Stegal constraints. It was hard to argue against repeal back then.

The Bob Rubin Citigroup story makes it seem not so innocent.

Perfits, from the NY Times (and I'm sure you know everything they write is 100% true)
November 5, 1999
CONGRESS PASSES WIDE-RANGING BILL EASING BANK LAWS

By STEPHEN LABATON
Congress approved landmark legislation today that opens the door for a new era on Wall Street in which commercial banks, securities houses and insurers will find it easier and cheaper to enter one another's businesses.

The measure, considered by many the most important banking legislation in 66 years, was approved in the Senate by a vote of 90 to 8 and in the House tonight by 362 to 57. The bill will now be sent to the president, who is expected to sign it, aides said. It would become one of the most significant achievements this year by the White House and the Republicans leading the 106th Congress.

''Today Congress voted to update the rules that have governed financial services since the Great Depression and replace them with a system for the 21st century,'' Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers said. ''This historic legislation will better enable American companies to compete in the new economy.''
By looking at the vote, it's obvious that A LOT of dems voted for it and if he was fundamentally opposed to it, Clinton could have vetoed it. Even if his veto were to be over-ridden, that's no excuse for signing a bill you don't agree with. Listen, I think there's blame enough to go around, from the people that took out loans they never should have to the bankers that made boatloads of cash. IT is not solely a dem or repub caused poblem. IMHO

petr - congress approved commercial banks to begin allowing securities activities back in 1988. I think it was a democratically controlled congress at the time but not 100% sure. In any event, this modification to the Bank Holding Company Act initally provided commercial banks to generate 5% of their revenues from securities related activities. This gradually increased to 25% of total revenues and every step of the way was approved by Congress. GLB was enacted AFTER the wall between commercial and investment banking effectively came down.

mets2009 why are you so earnestly trying to give Clinton credit for a bill that was written by Republicans, presented into congress by ALL republicans, named after 3 Republicans, voted on by a significant major of Republicans and the actual tenant of the Republican party policy?

Why are you giving Clinton the credit for your party's work?

Why wont just one of you Republicans admit the act repealing Glass Steigal was written by ALL republicans?

I don't understand??

Are you ashamed of the act that your party wrote, introduced, and overwhelmingly passed?

Please don't label me, I feel so used.

Apparently Democrats are not so level headed.

Riversider - was that act not written by Republicans? Please prove me worng?

I want to be like the govt.. can I impose a tax on someone to recover my bad investments?

petrfitz per 9/11, there are lots of arguments on boths sides casting blame, why don't you just do the respectful thing and stfu?

regards

Petrfitz, no idea who you are but you sound like a nut (Republican or Democrat being irrelevant). Wall street was "deregulated" (as you call it) under Clinton in the 90's, I suggest you go look it up. I don't have as much of a problem with the idea of a tax, however, even the banks that did not take TARP money or how have paid it back, are hit by it. Now, you could still make an economic argument that theses institutions should be taxed as well since the gov't bailout of AIG and other banks who cannot pay it back also, clearly, benefited them. Having said that, why are GM and Chrysler left out whent they took 66 billion of taxpayer money and have not paid it back (and as much admit that they will never be able to)? Answer, because (i) they are unionized and therefore sacred cows for Democrats and (ii) the gov't owns a majority stake in them (of course the gov't also owns most of AIG to so go figure). To exclude the two entities that, together, add up to 1/2 of all TARP funds that are NOT being repaid highlights exactly what this is, populist BS to help poll numbers.

Perfitz, a)I'm a registered democrat and b) there was more than the repeal of Glass Steagall that caused the financial crisis.

Clinton's Treasury Secretary seemed to highly favor it.

petr- Both parties are to blame. Your partisan hack analysis is just silly.

mktmaker - who wrote the act that repealed the Glass Steigal Act?

who introduced that act into congress?

Please answer

LIC I agree that Clintons Treasury Sec favored it. But will you tell me who wrote it?

I really don't go who gets the blame.
That bill in my opinion the single stupidest thing both parties allowed to happen and provided the soil for the position we are in today.
We need a new bill reinstating these previous regulations. You give any bank that wants to be a bank a step out program over a 2/3/5 year period to sell off, break up or whatever and end this co-mingling.
There is enough money to be made on mortgages, loans, and credit card interest. In fact, the banks enjoy the single best thing ever, a guaranteed minimum margin to sell their products....money.
I would love such a guarantee in my business.
These inappropriate unions of trade sectors have to be disbanded. Otherwise we are in for the same thing within 10 years.

mktmaker - amen. samadams, somewherelse, bueller, bueller?

correction
"I really don't care who gets the blame."

Just saw the longer thread petrfitz. The point is not who authored the bill or who proposed it (yes, it was a Rebulican darling but tons of Democrats signed on too). The point is that Clinton signed it into law. It was bipartisan. Do you really need to find some way to suggest that this is all one party's fault? It was both parties fault. Heck, Bush tried to reform Freddie and Fanny but was stopped by the Democrats (Barney Frank chief among them). Does that absolve Bush of blame for not doing more? Of course not. However, it also does not shield Democrats from responsibility in this either. To say that a President who signs a bill into law should not be held accountable for it is part of the head in the sand political thinking that has gotten us in this mess.

Again Not One Republican defender who blames Clinton for signing the act is willing to admit that your party wrote, introduced, and overwhelmingly passed the act.

You guys are so brave and so proud of your party's accomplishments.

turn off the PC, take a nice walk, breath the fresh air

petr, we are all saying that both parties are at fault. You are the only one insanely pushing a partisan argument.

truthsker - the repeal of glass steagall is not the origin of the financial crisis. your point might be credible for other reaasons but really is not the basis for the mess we are still cleaning up. the biggest threat to the financials came directly out of the "traditional" securities firms - Bear Stearns, Lehman and Merrill. And you can include AIG in that camp too. Glass Steagall reform had nothing to do with those firms overlevereging themselves.

I am a Republican former Senator who actually voted on this Act. I am proud to say that our party wrote, introduced and passed this act in Congress. I believe this act is in the interest of the Central Tenant of the GOP to deregulate and to let industry regulate itself.

I voted to pass this Act in best interests of the people of Idaho that I represent each day.

> Funds used to bail out the banks have not been lost.

Sure they have. You think all that money to cover AIG wasn't to bail out Goldman?

rangersfan

They were just the first. If B.Stearns,lehman and Merrill didn't exist, we would still find ourselves in this position...maybe a year later...3 years later.
And Citibank would have been the first.
It created the climate for Freddie and Fannie, the seeds in th soil.
In fact the proof is in JP Morgan Chase, the only bank that mostly kept acting like a bank, which kept it relatively healthy.

Banks were and have to be different than all other finacial institutions. Faith in savings deposits have to be bullet proof. Without that, stability is in question at all times.
When banks have other interests comingled with their operation, there can be no faith.

Hello, Reagan? Reagan had the initial hand in deregulate, deregulate, deregulate. The 12 years of Reagan and Bush 1 laid the groundwork for the shite in which we all struggle today. Clinton couldn't undo all of Reaganomics and market forces then didn't impel him to do so .......
Reagan, Reagan, Reagan ---------- that smarmy stupid smile -- the ultimate puppet for militario-industrio

Hard to imagine that you will look back on 2009 as the good old times before taxes got totally out of hand.

Current Administration including Timmy are very pro-Wall Street. Same people who were in the Clinton Administration. It wasn't that they were looking to bail out Goldman so much as they were in a state of panic and could not imagine a world without a U.S. banking industry and one run by the largest institutins we see today. So they did what they had to.

Considering they created the current environment(large conglomerate banks that offer every product with minimal regulation), the actions they took to save it , should not come as a surprise. Bob, Larry & Timmy were not about to admit they were wrong back in 99.

I think your point is more credible with your last paragraph - and I agree with you on that basis. I don't agree on the other points. JPM is a major player in the traditional securities businesses, has a huge prop trading book and is a major asset manager. It just managed its risks better than the rest but had nothing to do with the regulatory structure.

Can we all possibly agree that we are morphing into a 2nd world country?

falcogold I will look back on 2000-2009 as the good times.. The good times when a republican adminstration asleeepat the wheel allowed banks to rip off the American people, then the same Administration gave those banks trillions of American tax payer dollars so they could rip off Americans even more,then the partisan morons defended this party by trying to shift the blame to someone who was not the President, and the world forgot that we are all broke and losing 2 wars, and our homes, and our health care. Man the worst economic decade in US history that was presided upon by Republicans were the happy times!

fannie and freddie the auto companies cost the tax payer 100's of billions but hey they vote democratic

It's a balance. Reagan saw we were over-regulated. It just went too far over the next two decades.

I agree with poorishlady

"Clinton couldn't undo all of Reaganomics and market forces"

Correct, he actually picked them up and ran with them.... he repealed Glass Steagall, what Regan would have loved to have done.

I agree with poorishlady
we're becoming 2nd world

Peter, I think you have some holes in your understanding of the crisis. To wit, you wrote:

"were you worried about consumers when the republican deregulated Wall STreet was stealing every last cent of savings, as well as, the roof over their heads by selling knowingly bad products, making derivatives of them then betting against them?
Oh yeah dont hurt the consumers that we just robbed of every last cent!"

In fact, Wall Street was both buyer AND seller of the "bad products," i.e. real estate backed loans of every stripe. Generally, the better pieces of the subsequent securitizations were sold to traditional institutional buyers, and the majority of those senior tranches will perform over time, so not much robbery there. The gristly bits were generally retained by the large banks, and the ensuing wipeout of collateral value is what really set the downward spiral in motion. A few clever operators (Goldman) hedged this exposure.

I understand where the anger comes from given the whole cocktail party narrative borne of the Huffington Post / Goldman as Vampire Squid / angry Paul Krugman contingent, but your portrayal of the situation as a scheme perpetrated by cooperating evildoers out to rob mom and pop is a bit extreme to the point of being childish. As a purported businessperson, you really should have a better grasp of the nuance.

"good times when a republican adminstration asleeepat the wheel allowed banks to rip off "

Clearly perfitz has been asleep... didn't notice all those Democrats who were actually doing the things he's trying to blame elswhere.

Then again, perfitz also completely missed the market crash we warned him about, and his portfolio went from $10 to $5.

So its not like thats a surprise...

Commodity futures modernization act was a mistake, but in defense of its sponsors, they were talking about interest rate swaps not credit default swaps. The current crisis has very little to do with fixed for float swaps.

But now the Democrats are back and partying it up in Copenhagen. How responsible.

rangersfan

Well exactly, JP Morgan regulated themselves better. They have always been at least twice as conservative as other banks. Annoyingly so. (I was with them for my business accountants for 15 years)
Deregulation was more of a hmmm, ok, we have more room to play but old school still stick like molasses to them. 1929 is still yesterday to them.That lesson really stuck. (And yes despite the fact that they are more Chase in name and Chemical bank in operation)

I know, I work at JPM.

LOL..So I'm preaching to the choir.
Heck I go back (I was a kid and more my dad) to Manny Hanny days!

Which is probably the last time I paid attention to the Rangers sad to say.
Ron Duguay, Phil Esposito, the Maloney bros and the Islanders were the Yankees.

Nice! The golden years.

The problem is that we are still debating the illusion.
The illusion that our elected officials are representing us and that this a democracy by the people.
This is a country manipulated by the very rich for the needs of the very rich. Where did Paulson work before he insisted that we drop a gazillion dollars on the same folks that robbed us? Where did Cheney work before Halliburton won all those no bid multimillion dollar middle eastern contracts? Their not even going to the trouble of masking it!!!! They don't even respect us enough to fake it.
The time for revolution is now!
Non-violent non-cooperation!
Let's ID the institutions, let's analyze the crimes, let's hold ALL PERSONS in the employ of these cooperation's responsible. EVERY LAST ONE!!!
Time for Americans to grow up and be responsible!!!
You want to sit on the couch watching Jerry Springer, smoking cigarette, sipping from a 55 gallon drum of high fructose corn syrup? When you get high blood pressure and diabetes and you want to tap MY TAX DOLLARS for you chronic health care needs let me be the first to say...GO F*CK YOURSELF!
Wal-Mart should be able to sell you the do-it-yourself toe amputation kit.
My mother always said, "the way you make your bed is the way you sleep in it".
My mother needed a bigger audience.

"Asleep at the wheel" is far to generous to those at fault.
Republicans and Democrats actively assisted in the frauds that went on.
Henry Paulson and Geitner were not asleep when they ordered AIG to pay back dollar for dollar what the banks should have lost from their risky bets. They were very much awake and actively helping out their buds, just as their buds would have done for them (and in the future will do for them).
Wall street and Goldman Sachs in particular can say all they want about how clever they were and how they earned their money this year, but the fact is if Goldman didn't have their double agents at the highest levels of gov't (both in republican and democrat highest levels) acting to ensure they got paid all the billions of $ they should have lost from their risky bets backed by AIG et al. their bonuses would have been zero.
Goldman wasn't clever enough to prevent massive losses from risky bets, they were clever enough to put their alums at the highest levels of govt to steer billions of tax payer dollars into their bonus accounts.
Good old fashioned patronage and siphoning of govt money (in this case billions) for your business associates.
Now that's clever.

Goldman was the #2 donor to the Obama campaign.... and gave about 3 to 1 democratic candidates vs. republican.

streeteasy, agreed... we have liars and crooks and morons on both sides, and it took both to create such a mess, and if anyone thinks its just one side, they're a liar or an idiot.

"he repealed Glass Steagall"

You Republicans are just f'ing pussies.

Why cant you say "Republicans wrote a bill, introduced it in congress, named it after Republicans, and voted it through. This Act was our doing that was so obviously irresponsible that Clinton should not have signed it"

Instead you are liars and disingenuous when you say "Clinton repealed Glass Steigal"

Just one of you have the balls to admit it was the Republican party policy that Clinton signed. Just one of you.

You are a bunch of fucking liars who try to run from the policies that you made, supported, and named after yourselves.

So, let me get this straight, Bush doesn't bear any responsibility for the things the Democratic congress passed and he signed?

Come on, perfitz.. answer... you just walked yourself into a trap....

I actually disagree with some of what EasyStreet says. Goldman has a history of serving in government. The issue is that we have a system in place that packed our highest offices with people from just one company. We also have a system in place where the Fed & Treasy are not accountable. Goldman probably believed they were hedged, but failed to recognize the systemic counter-party risk. I believe Blankfein was sincere in that he now wanted a central clearing house(too bad he doesn't want a central exchange as well).

Robert Rubin - Democratic Govt/Citibank Director and Executive committee chair
Henry Paulson - Republican Govt/Goldman Chief

What's the difference betw the two?
Both sold their fellow Americans out to earn millions for themselves and their buds.

It is and always be both sides. Exactly
My greatest beef with Clinton is he was/is a different kind of whore. It's one thing to let americans steal from america or americans, but he gave it more to foreign interests than any other.

and correction on a prev post
(I was with them for my business ACCOUNTS not accountants for 15 years)

> Robert Rubin - Democratic Govt/Citibank Director and Executive committee chair
> Henry Paulson - Republican Govt/Goldman Chief

Corzine.... Democratic Senator, then Governor, oversaw one of the most corrupt and poorly managed state administrations

"It is and always be both sides. Exactly
My greatest beef with Clinton is he was/is a different kind of whore. It's one thing to let americans steal from america or americans, but he gave it more to foreign interests than any other."

The problem is when the followers of one side get so suckered in by the rhetoric and don't think for themselves, and end up getting suckered worse. We have a nation of perfitzes. Nothing will ever get fixed if votes act like him and just point fingers at the other side.

You guys are complete liars by saying Clinton repealed Glass Steigal.

Say it right:

Clinton signed an Act written by Republicans, introduced by Republicans, named after Republicans, passed by a majority of republicans that repealed the Glass Steigal Act.

That is the truth. You are partisan liars.

oh yeah - 9/11 also happened on your watch.

I could hear Clinton now..." I did not have written relations with that bill."

what about all the idiots who got sucked into the housing bubble; it is always convent blaming someone else...

Riversider, I agree Goldman believed they were hedged. They placed a big bet. They lost.
They should have lost all that money.
Instead, when they lost their bet, their buddies in gov't gave them their 12 billion dollars back which they then paid out to themselves in bonus money.
ie they paid themselves bonuses with taxpayer money when they lost their own money.
How can one possibly see it otherwise.
They lost their bet but they didn't lose their money.
Where can I find a casino like that.
I want in!

other great accomplishments of the Republican Party:

1 - The Great Depression
2 - The Savings & Load Scandal that wiped out Americans life savings
3 - 9/11
4 - the Iraq War - both of them failures.
5 - not getting Osama
6 - The Great Recession (overseeing the worst economic performance decade in US History!)

Man you guys are winners!

7 - Ending Slavery

8 - Winning the cold war

9 -Nixon

10 -Iran/Contra

Shall we start a democrat list?

1 - responsible for the continuance of slavery after the Revolutionary War
2 - responsible for the civil war
3 - Barney Frank "FANNIE IS FINE"
4 - Union corruption (welcome to NYC!)
5 - The "open admissions" experiment that destroyed NYC top public colleges, once the best anywhere
6 - The destruction of the NYC public school system
7 - Jimmy Carter
8 - Clinton was the guy in power when the 9/11 plan was hatched....
9 - Pedro Espada and his gang
10 - Uh, Albany? The most corrupt state in America is ours, and its 100% democrat!

11 -Nassau Countie's Financial Woes

11 - The removal of personal responsibility

12 -Glen Beck

what's funny is, most of perfitz' list was passed by Democrats!

just a side note on Union corruption, NYC doesn't hold a candle to Chicago

12 - Jesse Jackson
13 - Al Sharpton

(got to love your party elders)

Clinton got a blow job, REpublicans lost 2 wars and ruined the American Economy.

perfitz, you need to pick up a better book than "democratic propaganda for really big dummies"