I agree with the first part of the second excerpt, but its a bit to general to say banks - its rather more the banks who are owned and controlled by the 'club' - which is nevertheless the critical mass like JP Morgan and Goldman with HSBC to name the top of the breed. I doubt though that a tax like proposed would do any good since that are neglectable costs for a real good organised market manipulation. They go for 50-100 % in such trades what a difference does that make - none - its rather more the administrative assistance like stopping short sales of banks or other stupid rules they use to force prices into their direction. The problem is systematic DC and all governments are basically so rotten that one can summarize who ever wrote the protocols of the Elders of Zion can say check mission accomplished. This antisemitic nonsense is anyway the smartest defense to hide the real people behind this are a Jewish aristocratic gang od Rothschild's and Rockefeller's with other families who think they have the direct legacy of King David or/ and even Jesus and are the chosen ones. There is a tug of war between the Vatikan and the Prior de Sion in Europe ( The Prior think as well they are direct siblings of Maria Magdalena and Jesus and in a way Jeweish) and the Illuminati forces in America against the Vatican but here the influence of the Vatican is anyway modest. The force really between both is that they obey Lucifer as the God of their choice that şis why the highest ranks starting at 33 with Freemasonry have all Satanist procedes and the Skulls and Bones is a centerpiece of that in America.
- The interview is virulently anti Semitic in the sense that both men characterize this conspiracy as "Jewish" and make many nasty racist generalizations. In fact, "the Jews" are really the Rothschilds and a few hundred banking families and their non-Jewish allies united by intermarriage and occult beliefs. The vast majority of Jews like other people are unaware of this plot and would oppose it if they were. Jews are as much its unwitting dupes and victims as anyone else.
- The Rothschilds set up the Illuminati in 1776 to subvert the Christian basis of Western Civilization. They took over much of Freemasonry and used it to infiltrate all social institutions. Mouthing words like "freedom," "equality" and "progress," they are bent on melding family, race, religion, and nation into a malleable anonymous mush. Their world police state, now called "globalization," lies behind the facade of "The Patriot Act" and "The War on Terror."
- Rosenthal says, "Most Jews do not like to admit it, but our god is Lucifer...and we are his chosen people. Lucifer is very much alive."
- This statement applies to modern culture as a whole. We do not like to admit that our "secular" society is based on a cosmic rebellion against God. Its true satanic character is becoming more evident every day.
Last month, when the US Congress failed to pass a bankruptcy reform measure that would have allowed home mortgages to be modified in bankruptcy, senator Dick Durbin succinctly commented: "The banks own the place." That seems pretty clear.
After all, it was the banks' greed that fed the housing bubble with loony loans that were guaranteed to go bad. Of course the finance guys also made a fortune guaranteeing the loans that were guaranteed to go bad (ie AIG), and when everything went bust, the taxpayers got handed the bill. The cost of the bailout will certainly be in the hundreds of billions, if not more than $1tn when it is all over.
More importantly, we are looking at the most severe economic downturn since the Great Depression. The cumulative lost output over the years 2008-2012 will almost certainly exceed $5tn. That comes to more than $60,000 for an average family of four. This is the price that we are paying for the bankers' greed, coupled with incredible incompetence and/or corruption from our regulators.
Under these circumstances, it would be reasonable to think that the bankers would be keeping a low profile for a while. That's not the way it works in Washington. The banks are aggressively pushing their case in Congress and Obama administration. Not only are we not going to see bankruptcy reform, but any financial reform package that gets through Congress will probably contain enough loopholes that it will be almost useless.
In this political environment, the poor might get empathy, but Wall Street gets money, and lots of it. Even when the issue is global warming Wall Street has its hand out. The fees on trading carbon permits could run into the hundreds of billions of dollars in coming decades. A simple carbon tax would have been far more efficient, but efficiency is not the most important value when it comes to making Wall Street richer.
This is why it was so encouraging to see congressman Peter DeFazio's proposal to tax trades in oil options and futures. DeFazio proposed a tax of 0.02% on trades in oil futures and options as a way to make up a shortfall in the federal government's highway trust fund. This tax could raise billions of dollars each year in revenue and make speculation in the oil market a more dangerous affair.
The logic is very simple. For someone using these markets to hedge, the tax will be inconsequential. For example, a farmer that hedges a $400,000 wheat crop will pay $80 when selling a future. Similarly, airlines that hedge by buying oil futures will barely notice the higher cost. In fact, because trading costs have fallen so much in recent decades, a tax at this level would just be raising costs back to their levels of two decades ago, a point at which there was already a very vibrant futures and options market.
However, even a modest tax will make life much more difficult for speculators. Many of them expect to make quick short-term gains, often buying and selling the same day. For these traders, an increase in transactions costs of 0.02% would be a burden.
Of course, a modest tax will not drive the speculators out of the market altogether, it is just likely to reduce the volume of speculation. For this reason, even a modest tax can still raise an enormous amount of money in a market where tens of trillions of dollars of derivatives changes hands each year.
This tax can best be thought of as a tax on gambling. Gambling is heavily taxed in every state that allows it. DeFazio's bill is effectively a tax on gambling in the oil markets. It will not stop it, but it would discourage it, and in the process raise a huge amount of money that could go to productive purposes.
The bill faces an enormous uphill struggle in Congress. As Durbin said, the banks own the place, and they are not going to just step aside and let Congress impose a tax on such a lucrative business. But, it is important that people know about the DeFazio bill. First, DeFazio deserves a place on the honour roll for standing up to Wall Street.
Also, it is important for the public to know that there is a relatively low-cost way to make up the shortfall in the highway trust fund. When Congress raises some other tax and/or cuts a useful programme, people should know that there was a better alternative. It just didn't happen because, as we know, the banks own the place.