Elizabeth Warren's Non-Specific FFT Plan & Hillary's Stalking Horse

From Lionel at Lionel Nation
Why is she even considered? Why? because she seems nice and familiarly dowdy and Amy Goodman-esque, like the nice lady with a lot of rescued dogs you see at Whole Foods who brings the cloth bag. The usual progressive leftie soft-spoken nice woman who’s real smart and seems anodyne. Do you think I’m kidding? The smart counter to the paleo-cretinous Neanderthal right.

Close but no cigar. While Elizabeth Warren has endorsed a Financial Transactions Tax (FTT), it’s been less than specific. This week she gave a speech at the Levy Economics Institute of Bard College’s 24th Annual Hyman P. Minsky Conference, broaching the idea of a financial transaction tax (FTT) for her first time on record.

“High-frequency traders, for example, introduce greater instability into our financial markets through arbitraging gimmicks that add no value to the economy.

We can address this problem by instituting a targeted Financial Transactions Tax, designed to have no impact on regular ‘Mom and Pop’ investors. Such a tax would push sophisticated trading firms to invest in companies for the long-haul and strengthen our markets.”

It’s a start. Sorta. While this is certainly a positive step for Warren, she’s still behind others in her party because she gives no specific percentage(s) for an FTT.  Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD ) in January had already proposed a FTT, with 0.1% on stock trades and 0.01% on derivatives. Van Hollen’s FTT was so popular with the Democrats that Nancy Pelosi endorsed it. Well, Liz? Specifics. It’s a start and is specific whereas Liz’s just isn’t. Sad. So close, yet so far.
Read More