

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Yesterday a single trader errantly programmed
a computer to sell billions of Proctor & Gamble stock rather
than the millions he intended. The mistake sent other traders scurrying
and the Dow plummeted almost 1,000 points in a half hour.
It was as though one man yanked the handle
on a slot machine with a force so great that it not only broke the handle,
but also sent thousands of other slot machines in motion. When they
finally rested, every machine came up three lemons.
In the aftermath, policy makers are focusing
on the ways computers are being used to control the market and questioning
the reliability of the technology. But it's clear that computers are
merely the tool that executed the problem. The root cause, however,
was speculation.
Fortunately, there is a reasonable means
by which Congress could discourage speculation -- the adoption of a
financial speculation tax. The tax would raise the cost of trading modestly,
but enough to make it unprofitable for the most egregious speculators.
It has gotten too easy to borrow money
and sell securities that you don't own. Bettors are allowed to sell
shares they do not have and could never afford. When they do so, they
turn legitimate markets into casinos. It's gotten so absurd that yesterday's
attempt to sell billions of shares of P&G set off no bells, even
though Proctor and Gamble only has 2.9 billion shares outstanding.
Another important reason behind the explosion
in speculation is the precipitous fall in trading costs. You know the
come-on: $7.95 per trade no matter how many shares. If you can trade
millions or even billions of shares and incur trading costs similar
to buying a Value Meal at McDonald's, the blessing for you can quickly
turn into a curse for everyone else.
Yesterday wasn't the first time the
world has seen the ugly face of speculation. Two years ago the dramatic
run-up in world food prices was hardly noticed by Americans, but meant
hunger and death for millions of our global neighbors. The media reported
this as a "food price crisis" -- one caused not by failed crops
or droughts, but by speculators seeking their gain at others' expense.
Likewise, last year's upward spiral in oil prices that sent gasoline
in some parts of the country to $5 a gallon, we know now was fueled
by oil speculators.
If Congress enacted a speculation tax,
most investors would pay a small amount, but for those with the intention
of holding stocks for the long-term, this fee would be more like an
insurance policy against the market fires lit by speculators. For instance,
one recently proposed financial speculation tax would impose about a
$14 annual fee on someone with a $10,000 mutual fund investment. That's
far less than fees paid to fund managers and investment advisors. Retirement
savings would be exempt.
There is considerable global interest
in adopting such a tax, with the political leaders in France, the United
Kingdom and Germany all voicing their support. Thus, if we succeed in
running speculators out of our market, they'll not be welcome in the
markets of our trading partners either. There is also support from leading
investors in the United States, including Warren Buffett and John Bogle,
the founder of Vanguard Investments who popularized low-cost index fund
investing. Sadly, the White House and Treasury Department continue to
oppose this proposal.
In addition to dampening speculation
in our markets, the financial speculation tax could raise $100 billion,
money that could be used for job creation at home or to fulfill U.S.
commitments to support international public health, poverty alleviation
and adaption to climate change, faced by those in developing nations.
We can't allow the greediest among
us to walk into the public market place and unilaterally turn it into
a private casino. We need many greed-controlling tools; a tax on financial
speculation is certainly one.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Yesterday a single trader errantly programmed
a computer to sell billions of Proctor & Gamble stock rather
than the millions he intended. The mistake sent other traders scurrying
and the Dow plummeted almost 1,000 points in a half hour.
It was as though one man yanked the handle
on a slot machine with a force so great that it not only broke the handle,
but also sent thousands of other slot machines in motion. When they
finally rested, every machine came up three lemons.
In the aftermath, policy makers are focusing
on the ways computers are being used to control the market and questioning
the reliability of the technology. But it's clear that computers are
merely the tool that executed the problem. The root cause, however,
was speculation.
Fortunately, there is a reasonable means
by which Congress could discourage speculation -- the adoption of a
financial speculation tax. The tax would raise the cost of trading modestly,
but enough to make it unprofitable for the most egregious speculators.
It has gotten too easy to borrow money
and sell securities that you don't own. Bettors are allowed to sell
shares they do not have and could never afford. When they do so, they
turn legitimate markets into casinos. It's gotten so absurd that yesterday's
attempt to sell billions of shares of P&G set off no bells, even
though Proctor and Gamble only has 2.9 billion shares outstanding.
Another important reason behind the explosion
in speculation is the precipitous fall in trading costs. You know the
come-on: $7.95 per trade no matter how many shares. If you can trade
millions or even billions of shares and incur trading costs similar
to buying a Value Meal at McDonald's, the blessing for you can quickly
turn into a curse for everyone else.
Yesterday wasn't the first time the
world has seen the ugly face of speculation. Two years ago the dramatic
run-up in world food prices was hardly noticed by Americans, but meant
hunger and death for millions of our global neighbors. The media reported
this as a "food price crisis" -- one caused not by failed crops
or droughts, but by speculators seeking their gain at others' expense.
Likewise, last year's upward spiral in oil prices that sent gasoline
in some parts of the country to $5 a gallon, we know now was fueled
by oil speculators.
If Congress enacted a speculation tax,
most investors would pay a small amount, but for those with the intention
of holding stocks for the long-term, this fee would be more like an
insurance policy against the market fires lit by speculators. For instance,
one recently proposed financial speculation tax would impose about a
$14 annual fee on someone with a $10,000 mutual fund investment. That's
far less than fees paid to fund managers and investment advisors. Retirement
savings would be exempt.
There is considerable global interest
in adopting such a tax, with the political leaders in France, the United
Kingdom and Germany all voicing their support. Thus, if we succeed in
running speculators out of our market, they'll not be welcome in the
markets of our trading partners either. There is also support from leading
investors in the United States, including Warren Buffett and John Bogle,
the founder of Vanguard Investments who popularized low-cost index fund
investing. Sadly, the White House and Treasury Department continue to
oppose this proposal.
In addition to dampening speculation
in our markets, the financial speculation tax could raise $100 billion,
money that could be used for job creation at home or to fulfill U.S.
commitments to support international public health, poverty alleviation
and adaption to climate change, faced by those in developing nations.
We can't allow the greediest among
us to walk into the public market place and unilaterally turn it into
a private casino. We need many greed-controlling tools; a tax on financial
speculation is certainly one.
Yesterday a single trader errantly programmed
a computer to sell billions of Proctor & Gamble stock rather
than the millions he intended. The mistake sent other traders scurrying
and the Dow plummeted almost 1,000 points in a half hour.
It was as though one man yanked the handle
on a slot machine with a force so great that it not only broke the handle,
but also sent thousands of other slot machines in motion. When they
finally rested, every machine came up three lemons.
In the aftermath, policy makers are focusing
on the ways computers are being used to control the market and questioning
the reliability of the technology. But it's clear that computers are
merely the tool that executed the problem. The root cause, however,
was speculation.
Fortunately, there is a reasonable means
by which Congress could discourage speculation -- the adoption of a
financial speculation tax. The tax would raise the cost of trading modestly,
but enough to make it unprofitable for the most egregious speculators.
It has gotten too easy to borrow money
and sell securities that you don't own. Bettors are allowed to sell
shares they do not have and could never afford. When they do so, they
turn legitimate markets into casinos. It's gotten so absurd that yesterday's
attempt to sell billions of shares of P&G set off no bells, even
though Proctor and Gamble only has 2.9 billion shares outstanding.
Another important reason behind the explosion
in speculation is the precipitous fall in trading costs. You know the
come-on: $7.95 per trade no matter how many shares. If you can trade
millions or even billions of shares and incur trading costs similar
to buying a Value Meal at McDonald's, the blessing for you can quickly
turn into a curse for everyone else.
Yesterday wasn't the first time the
world has seen the ugly face of speculation. Two years ago the dramatic
run-up in world food prices was hardly noticed by Americans, but meant
hunger and death for millions of our global neighbors. The media reported
this as a "food price crisis" -- one caused not by failed crops
or droughts, but by speculators seeking their gain at others' expense.
Likewise, last year's upward spiral in oil prices that sent gasoline
in some parts of the country to $5 a gallon, we know now was fueled
by oil speculators.
If Congress enacted a speculation tax,
most investors would pay a small amount, but for those with the intention
of holding stocks for the long-term, this fee would be more like an
insurance policy against the market fires lit by speculators. For instance,
one recently proposed financial speculation tax would impose about a
$14 annual fee on someone with a $10,000 mutual fund investment. That's
far less than fees paid to fund managers and investment advisors. Retirement
savings would be exempt.
There is considerable global interest
in adopting such a tax, with the political leaders in France, the United
Kingdom and Germany all voicing their support. Thus, if we succeed in
running speculators out of our market, they'll not be welcome in the
markets of our trading partners either. There is also support from leading
investors in the United States, including Warren Buffett and John Bogle,
the founder of Vanguard Investments who popularized low-cost index fund
investing. Sadly, the White House and Treasury Department continue to
oppose this proposal.
In addition to dampening speculation
in our markets, the financial speculation tax could raise $100 billion,
money that could be used for job creation at home or to fulfill U.S.
commitments to support international public health, poverty alleviation
and adaption to climate change, faced by those in developing nations.
We can't allow the greediest among
us to walk into the public market place and unilaterally turn it into
a private casino. We need many greed-controlling tools; a tax on financial
speculation is certainly one.