Bill Gates backs financial transaction tax to aid poor

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,304
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#1
Bill Gates backs financial transaction tax to aid poor

Fri Sep 23, 2011 4:04pm

A report by Microsoft founder Bill Gates to Group of 20 ministers on Friday proposes raising new funding for poorer countries by taxing financial transactions, tobacco, and shipping and aviation fuels, according to details of a G20 report obtained by Reuters.

The Gates Foundation was tasked by current G20 chair, France, to look at how the governments of its member countries could raise on euro crisis, new money for aid to developing nations, including plugging an BRICS mull more estimated $80-100 billion funding gap to help the poor adapt to aid climate change.

With traditional Western donors in Europe and the United States under pressure to cut their budgets, developing nations are looking at news ways to raise resources to develop their growing economies.

Gates' point, according to a draft technical note on the report, is that
if African countries can maintain current average growth rates, their equity IPO risks economies will double in size by early next decade and gross domestic product per capital will rise by more than 50

While countries in Africa are looking increasingly toward China and India for support, there is also pressure on Western donors to keep their commitments to aid impoverished nations.

World Bank President Robert Zoellick this week warned that the European crisis was already affecting developing economies through declining demand. He said budgets of poor countries have not yet fully recovered from the double shock of the 2008 global financial crisis and a food price crisis.

He said more than 40 percent of developing nations now have government deficits in excess of 4 percent of GDP.

South African Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan said there was rising concern among policymakers in developing economies about the escalating crisis in Europe and how it could impact their economies.

He said poorer countries were "innocent bystanders that had to suffer quite significantly because of the crisis that we had nothing to do with".

"Not only is the traditional aid envelope being impact upon by the current developments, but the private financing part is also potentially impacted negatively," Gordhan said.

THORNY FINANCIAL TRANSACTION TAX

The Gates report supports the thorny issue of a financial transaction tax as a way of raising "substantial resources" for developing countries. It suggests even a small tax of 10 basis points on equities and 2 basis points on bonds would raise about $48 billion among G20 member states, or $9 billion if only adopted by larger European countries.

Countries such as Canada, Britain, the United States, Australia and China oppose the tax because it puts more burden on banks, while France, Germany and Austria support it.

"Our position hasn't changed - we're still opposed," said Mary Ann Dewey-Plante, spokeswoman for Canada's Finance Minister Jim Flaherty referring to the financial transaction tax. She said testimony in August by Flaherty called such a tax "punitive and counter-productive" because it reduced banks' lending ability during weak economic growth.

U.S.-based business groups on Friday voiced their concern at growing calls for a financial transaction tax, saying they had written to U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to reiterate their opposition.

"A transaction tax will cycle through the entire U.S. economy, harming both investors, and businesses," the group of trade associations said. "A number of studies have shown that a FTT will impede the efficiency of markets, impair depth and liquidity, raise costs to issuers, investors, and pensioners, and distort capital flows by discriminating against asset classes," they said.

The groups included the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers and the National Federation of Independent Business.

TACKLING CLIMATE COSTS

Gates' report will also propose a "compelling case" for all governments to tax tobacco heavily to reduce consumption, and generate revenue to meet health costs. It could raise about $170 billion a year in G20 countries.

While some countries already tax tobacco heavily, the average excise tax in G20 countries is 48 percent, and poorer countries tend to be much lower, the report will say.

Gates also supports World Bank and International Monetary Fund proposals to introduce taxes on shipping and aviation fuels, even though these are politically hard to agree on and technically complicated to design, the note said.

IMF and World Bank studies show a carbon-based bunker fuel tax, for example, could raise $30 billion annually by 2020.

A meeting in South Africa in November will tackle the next round of climate change talks. Disputes between rich and poor on sharing curbs in greenhouse gases have slowed agreement on a new global climate agreement.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011...=Feed:+reuters/topNews+(News+/+US+/+Top+News)
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,628
5,081
568
Wyoming
#2
I have an idea. Let's tax operating systems based on how much drive space they take up.
 

whiskeyguy

PR representative for Drunk Whiskeyguy.
Donator
Jan 12, 2010
36,346
21,958
398
Northern California
#3
He said budgets of poor countries have not yet fully recovered from the double shock of the 2008 global financial crisis and a food price crisis.
Neither have rich countries.

He said more than 40 percent of developing nations now have government deficits in excess of 4 percent of GDP.
Sweet, so when do they start donating to the US, which in 2010 had a deficit equal to around 8% of its GDP?

Countries should donate to developing nations if the people support it and they can afford it. We can't afford it. Further harming out fiscal position is not going to help anyone in the long run.
 

lajikal

Registered User
Aug 6, 2009
15,698
3,825
328
#4
No. 1: Carlos Slim Helú & family
$74 billion | Telecom | Mexico

No. 2: Bill Gates
$56 billion | Microsoft | U.S.

No. 3: Warren Buffett
$50 billion | Berkshire Hathaway| U.S.
At this point I'd rather go by with what gates/2nd richest in the world recommends. We know what happened the first time people didn't take him seriously.
 

d0uche_n0zzle

**Negative_Creep**
Sep 15, 2004
46,670
6,859
693
F.U.B.A.R
#5
Bill Gates should fuck off and die already. What a major CUNT hole he has become.
 

Yesterdays Hero

She's better than you, Smirkalicious.
Jan 25, 2007
16,376
3,918
571
Canada. Land of the Fat.
#6
Bill Gates should fuck off and die already. What a major CUNT hole he is.
FIFY.

I enjoy Billionaires that have so much money, they could never spend it all. They just kind of sit on it, while making the token donation here and there to save face. Delicious.
 

lajikal

Registered User
Aug 6, 2009
15,698
3,825
328
#7
Breaking his own records worlds' largest donations is sitting on it?

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Bill and Melinda Gates on Friday made the largest donation ever to a single cause: $10 billion to develop vaccines for the world's poorest nations.
 

lajikal

Registered User
Aug 6, 2009
15,698
3,825
328
#9
Breaking his own records worlds' largest donations is sitting on it?

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Bill and Melinda Gates on Friday made the largest donation ever to a single cause: $10 billion to develop vaccines for the world's poorest nations.
 

whiskeyguy

PR representative for Drunk Whiskeyguy.
Donator
Jan 12, 2010
36,346
21,958
398
Northern California
#10

Yesterdays Hero

She's better than you, Smirkalicious.
Jan 25, 2007
16,376
3,918
571
Canada. Land of the Fat.
#12
Breaking his own records worlds' largest donations is sitting on it?
Sure is. What do you need to live on really comfortably so your every whim is cared for as well as your kids? 100 Million? Shit, 500 if you wanted to be greedy?

Not that it matters of course. World's beyond help at this point anyway, regardless if it did a 180' and got it's shit together. Which it won't. Thankfully I might add. Keeps my Misanthropy strong and healthy. :icon_bigg
 

Your_Moms_Box

Free Shit / Socialism 2016
Dec 20, 2004
5,755
468
628
Dover, Delaware
#13
Why not just eliminate the capital gains special tax treatment and treat them as ordinary income.

Still don't understand why these people are able to make tens of millions of dollars and have it be in a 15% tax bracket.
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,304
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#14
Sure is. What do you need to live on really comfortably so your every whim is cared for as well as your kids? 100 Million? Shit, 500 if you wanted to be greedy?
I love it. A guy who made billions because of capitalism now wants to push socialism on the rest of the world now that he and his great-great-great-great grandchildren are set for life.
 

Yesterdays Hero

She's better than you, Smirkalicious.
Jan 25, 2007
16,376
3,918
571
Canada. Land of the Fat.
#15
I love it. A guy who made billions because of capitalism now wants to push socialism on the rest of the world now that he and his great-great-great-great grandchildren are set for life.
As long as it helps end Humanity that much faster, I'm all for it.
 

Sunsetspawn

Registered User
Dec 5, 2005
2,955
410
328
#16
Bob Page needs to fuck off and die already!
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,628
5,081
568
Wyoming
#17
Still don't understand why these people are able to make tens of millions of dollars and have it be in a 15% tax bracket.
Because they give people jobs. Why not lower everyone else's tax bracket to 15% instead of punishing those who actually do something?
 

TheDrip

I'm bi-winning.
Jan 9, 2006
5,051
3
228
#18
Gates should write bigger checks, then. Otherwise, the greedy cocksucker can just shut the fuck up.
 

English Gent

Registered User
Feb 15, 2005
16,077
182
508
#19
I love it. A guy who made billions because of capitalism now wants to push socialism on the rest of the world now that he and his great-great-great-great grandchildren are set for life.
^ This x 100. It irritates the fuck out of me to see extremely rich, socialist-leaning people advocate policies that will never have much impact on them or their families.
 

Hoagie

I suggest you tread lightly
Wackbag Staff
Mar 24, 2004
13,643
312
628
Your Mom's box
#20
^ This x 100. It irritates the fuck out of me to see extremely rich, socialist-leaning people advocate policies that will never have much impact on them or their families.
I'm a huge Pearl Jam fan and I love listening to live shows but that's one of the things that drives me up a wall about Eddie Vedder. He'll occasionally go on this crazy ultra-liberal rant and act like everyone has his money. Some people are just so rich for so long they lose all touch with what it's like to have to worry about money.
 

Don the Radio Guy

G-Bb-A-D
Donator
Mar 30, 2006
69,628
5,081
568
Wyoming
#21
I'm a huge Pearl Jam fan and I love listening to live shows but that's one of the things that drives me up a wall about Eddie Vedder. He'll occasionally go on this crazy ultra-liberal rant and act like everyone has his money. Some people are just so rich for so long they lose all touch with what it's like to have to worry about money.
In all fairness to Eddie Vedder, he'd be a smug condescending asshole if he were broke. He's just a cunt.
 

Norm Stansfield

私は亀が好きだ。
Mar 17, 2009
15,949
4,075
328
#22
Why not just eliminate the capital gains special tax treatment and treat them as ordinary income.

Still don't understand why these people are able to make tens of millions of dollars and have it be in a 15% tax bracket.
Because the companies also pay taxes on their profits, and capital gains tax is a tax added to that.

You might want to look into how much the rich pay in income taxes, compared to everyone else. Then answer a simple question: Would you think a fair tax (eliminating all taxes, except one: an income tax of equal rate on every American) would hurt or benefit the people you think are being undertaxed?

And how come conservatives are the only ones arguing for that tax system?
 

whiskeyguy

PR representative for Drunk Whiskeyguy.
Donator
Jan 12, 2010
36,346
21,958
398
Northern California
#23
Because the companies also pay taxes on their profits, and capital gains tax is a tax added to that.
This. Corporate taxes are taxed twice before the owners (shareholders) see any money... once as taxes on corporate profits, and then again as taxes on dividends paid to shareholders. It's like if you owned a gas station, and at the end of the month you deducted all your costs of doing business from your revenues, and the remaining balance (in your business account) was taxed 30%. Then you transferred money from that business account to your personal account, at which point the money would be taxed again at 15%. That's how corporate taxes are handled.

The money's already being taxed twice (on top of all the other taxes associated with doing business), yet people don't feel that's enough. That's one of the reasons we need a flat tax, so people can see exactly how much goes into the government and from where (might make them hesitant when it comes to wasteful spending).
 

Party Rooster

Unleash The Beast
Apr 27, 2005
40,304
7,454
438
The Inland Empire State
#24
Because they give people jobs.
How many jobs were created when we lowered it under Bush?

You might want to look into how much the rich pay in income taxes, compared to everyone else. Then answer a simple question: Would you think a fair tax (eliminating all taxes, except one: an income tax of equal rate on every American) would hurt or benefit the people you think are being undertaxed?
It would benefit moderately rich people and businesses. It would probably hurt huge multi-billion dollar businesses who are able to squirrel away a lot of their profits overseas.

And how come conservatives are the only ones arguing for that tax system?
Fun fact: Democrat Dennis DeConcini was the first congressman in modern times to introduce the concept of a flat tax to Congress.

But the short answer is they more represent poor people. They think that poor people's taxes would go up but when in fact, most flat tax proposals have a threshold where incomes below a certain amount would still be exempt. They also worry that it would drastically cut people's contributions to charitable organizations, which is a valid concern on both sides of the aisle.