Not convinced?

Robin Hood was a thief

Thanks for the video. I felt like I was being force fed an opinion.
Demonising the banks and taking money that they've earned doesn't solve anything, it would be a superficial achievement in the short term and would quickly disintegrate into waste.

No way am I going to support this, and I have a low income myself!

"Socialism everyone equally pull the plug:
Stifle the rich tomorrow - a day after the poor. "
Alexander hr. Fredro

Amazing how everyone wants someone else to pay for their free ride.(Not only is this stupid, I do not believe the numbers purported here. What a gimmick!)
As a society there are certain things we must have, for the benefit of the national entity. Military, communications, transportation...Those must be paid for by taxes. But as soon as we tax some to benefit others,we have begun down a slippery slope of socialism. The only real answer is a flat tax, that everyone pays (no loopholes or deductions), and a mandated balanced budget. THe last time I was able to spend more than I made was when I got my money from mommy and daddy. When did we, the taxpayers, become an ATM machine with no limit?

A government big enough to give you everything you want, is strong enough to take everything you have.-Thomas Jefferson

I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.
-Winston Churchill

A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
- George Bernard Shaw

Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.
-P.J. O’Rourke, Civil Libertarian

The only difference between a tax man and a taxidermist is that the taxidermist leaves the skin.
-Mark Twain

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money.
-G. Gordon Liddy

Your combination of lies and ignorance is appalling. Your lies that it would cost the banks so little. Yes it may be only a small amount per transaction, but a each part of a bank's money will be transferred hundreds of times each year, making what at first seems to be a small amount into something quite significant. Not an amount that executives in their glass offices would barely notice but rather a vast amount that would be felt all the way from the CEOs to the normal guys pushing pens and sorting mail.

And then there is your ignorance of the reaction that would result from such a tax. The banks would either as others have mentioned increase the charges on ordinary customers, in order to compensate for their loss as well as sneak in some extra profit as well. Either that or they would simply move their business elsewhere to where the British tax laws can't reach them and say either don't tax us or you lose our business.

Its a sad fact however that many of the people that see the videos and message of this campaign will not think this through and so will support a movement that will harm both them and the rest of this country.

the banks would simply increase things such as ATM charges, and recompense their losses that way - joe public always ends up paying. The ony way to control the banking system is to nationalise it

Nationalise? That seems to be the answer for everything with socialists. Putting the control into the hands of govenrment is dangerous and naive.."Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
George Washington

pjt has a good point. The Banks will just pas the daim to all of us using the banks, remember the easiest way to robb someone is to start a bank, they allways winn. I belive in tougher regulations on the credit given to banks, as well as hard taxes on employees in the banks who scimms and collect bonuses...

If you put this tax on the bank, they'll just charge it to us the customer. All that will happen is saving interest rates will go down and loan interest rates go up. Plus they'll dream up new services charges to get money out of us.

Its a sad fact that we're well and truely under there thumbs. In some ways who could blame them for doing it either? I know its unfair but business is business, the owners of the banks really aren't worried about fairness all their interested in profit

It will make more problems than help.. and who says we won't bear it, even if we like it or not (stealth tax).

I would support this only if it meant the total elimination of all other taxes, as an additional tax, no, no we already have far more then what is rational syphoned from the market.

I can also foresee damage to the investment market, less then say the effects of the progressive income tax or VAT but with those in addition to it, there is little warranted for even further taxes.

What is needed to help the poor is exactly what is being taxed, private investment and the market economy.

This is kind of stupid and the video is more preachy than educational

Are these guys serious.......... the best way to cure poverty is education, democratic institutions, rule of law and protection of private property and economic growth they all create. Throwing money (stolen from someone else) at this has never, ever worked.

Yes it will raise money but who do you think will pay this tax? Same as always - the consumer! Whatever you charge the banks will be passed on to us, probably at a higher rate.

What a stupid and ridicules idea. If you want to solve the banking problem and in fact all the problems in the world period, you have to take away the power that the banks have to create money out of thin air. Wake up you imbeciles, educate yourselves, lean how the money system really works. Research: fractional reserve banking, for starters.

Transactions are difficult to track. How about a tax on baby formula. First, people will buy it in any case, and secondly, I don't plan to have any more babies, so it will cost me nothing. And the proceeds could subsidize international soccer.
BTW, it is surprising to see 10:1 opinion favouring the tax but no support in the comments. Either you are faking it or supporters can't write.

imho, this is not a robin hood tax, but a robin hood theft.

IMHO. As I said in a comment elsewhere watch "Money as debt" first then, once you have your head around the REAL issue, we just might be able to have an intelligent discussion about any possible solutions.

A RHT is not one of them!! Neither is global governance of which the despotic mess going by the name UN is a fine example.

As for tipping Billions more into the AGW scam... which cesspit of denial are you clowns living in??

The only reason people are starving on this planet is due to a lack of political will (=self interest) certainly not a shortage of food!!

If we look to the headucation system we might just recognise we have allowed the stance of personal responsibility to be replaced by the current nanny state hand out mentality which plagues so many of our current institutions ;0 thus leading to the oversupply of bleeding hearts that come up with this sort of drivel.

I do believe it was your own Maggie Thatcher that said "The trouble with socialism is that you run out of other peoples money"

Nuff said. Putting soapbox away now...

poo and wee

Does anybody think that if the tax man puts this "TINY" (Over one hundred billion a year) tax in force....That the "INTERNATIONAL" Banks that will be the ones paying it....Might move to one of the other countries they operate in that doesnt charge them one hundred billion a year so not only wont we get the One hundred billion we will also lose the Billions and Billions that they currently pay in UK tax as well. The City is by far our most lucrative tax stream at the moment and your trying to push them out of the country... WAKE UP PEOPLE !!!

Sorry, I didn't see the results until I went back to the home page.

Problem is, who controls all this money and who gets to decide how it's spent?

It'll become one giant slush fund for someone's pet projects, for good or bad.

Why don't you show the result of the Yes No poll?

If only the world worked in such a simple and frankly stupid way! Basically people want a tax on success, which will not make anyone strive any harder and we can all go back to hunter and gatherer days! Move to Cuba people and tell me how happy they are!

I cannot believe people are this stupid! Where do you think this money will come from?? Any additional taxes or charges imposed on banks (even a tiny % is huge when multiplied over the billions of transactions made every day) will simply be passed on to consumers. The same consumers who will then complain about additional bank charges, low interest rates, etc. Will everybody please grow up and get back to work.

Simply well said and true.

More socialism. Stop the mad taxer!

Asking me whether it is a good idea after showing me a video of some people humming. Yah right! That gave me a lot to go on.

When you have the State backed privilege of counterfeiting money via the fractional reserve banking model, what does a "tax" matter?

When you can print pretty rectangular pieces of paper with different inks/designs on them indicating varying levels of purchasing power, how can you get a free market to voluntarily adopt them as money? How can I prevent a competitor from opening a competing money printing store?

Answer: I can't.

The only reason we use paper tickets and its' substitute - bank credit - as money at all is via State violence.

In other words, I can only get my money to be accepted by the market if I have a monopoly on violence to *FORCE* people to use it by creating artificial demand by way of taxation - if you don't have enough of my paper tickets come tax time, woe to you. I then can outlaw any other form of money by way of legal tender violence (sometimes called "law").

Our money has a long history of incremental State/Banking cartel's predations over generations to get us to the point where we don't question money at all - confidence. They transformed money - initially created in the free market - from an asset-backed freely accepted money into this debt-based fiat imposed horror show we are wedded to today.

The very nature of the problem we are in is that all money is created out of debt. All of it. Debt carries interest and must be repaid. Trouble is there is never enough money in circulation to pay back all outstanding debt. The interest on old loans must be repaid via the principal of new/future loans.

If the rate/volume of loans being retired is greater than the rate/volume of new loans being created, our monetary system (the same in all G20 countries) begins to experience a contraction in money supply. To combat this, a central bank artificially (via State violence) lowers interest rates to entice the populace to load up on new debt. If we don't respond the way they want us to (i.e. we hunker down and keep paying off old debt) for an extended period of time, the unit of currency collapses in hyper-deflation. Rome burns.

This is exactly what is happening with the EU now and this phenomena is embedded in *ALL* debt-backed fiat currency models. Sometimes this is called "the debt virus" or "the compund interest paradox".

This story (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100528/bs_nm/us_usa_fed_termdeposits) was very funny. Banks may now make term deposits at the Federal Reserve, earning interest. The maximum interest rate is 0.75%, the current Discount Rate. Do you see the bailout?

Large banks may borrow at the Fed Funds Rate, currently 0.25%. Therefore, large banks can borrow at the Fed Funds Rate and lend that money right back to the Federal Reserve. This is a guaranteed riskless profit for the banksters.

The interest rate on these "term deposits" will necessarily be greater than corresponding Treasury Notes. Otherwise, banks would buy Treasury Notes instead of making a term deposit at the Federal Reserve.

This program is a pure bailout for banks. They are borrowing at the Fed Funds Rate and lending at the "term deposit Rate". Only the largest banks may borrow from the Federal Reserve directly at the Fed Funds Rate. Other banks pay higher rates.

Tax. Pfft.

Government is a disease masquerading as its own cure

The answer is NO! Yeah, the banksters know how to promote anything they want as a good idea. But, they also know (and are lying right through their teeth) that these same bankers they want to supposedly 'tax' know the loopholes in the law. So, the only banks that will actually feel and participate in the 'tax' are the small ones - the competition for the Rothschild and comp. And the Rothschilds and comp just hate competition, for they want all the world's control and money for themselves... Don't worry, God will get them one day, I believe both here and in eternity for it's what He says in His Word! ~ praying for Israel, the US and Britain, the world, my fellow followers of Christ ~ a growing servant/life-slave of Jesus, SH

Socialist Robin Hood? Never!

Billions at your disposal... who couldn't resist? The biggest gravy train of all times to be managed by WWF, GreenPeace, the UN, OxFam.

I can understand you. I don't want to have to work too.

The Robin Hood tax is yet another symptom of the simplistic world views that are making a sensible discussion of banking regulation impossible. A transaction tax will NOT only hit evil bankers bonus payments, it will distort incentives and capital allocation, as any tax does. Yes, it will raise money that can help the poor, but so does any other tax. Still, we don't tax everything, as most can still see that taxes have distorting effects and some actually believe that taxes are often not fair - they punish initiative and productivity, virtues we should be rewarding.

Also, the evil banker interview on this site has a strange logic: 1st the guy won't admit to the tax being a small percentage, then he struggles to admit to it raising a very substantial amount ... ???

The fact is that the tax will raise a substantial amount, maybe the $200bn mentioned - where is that amount of money supposed to come from? The tax will make many financial transactions uneconomical and slap extra costs on everybody who uses the financial markets: evil, satanic hedge funds, bad, greedy private companies and angelic, doo-good governments.

The world has gone mad, the latest example is German chancellor Angela Merkel's badly thought through short-selling ban, which is being portrayed in the media as a ban on speculative trades. Just be aware that short-selling of bonds is essential to for example the people who manage your pension. Not all financial transactions are done in cohorts with the devil.

I'm just thinking, how dump you have to be to support this idea?!?
You people need to watch less TV and start to think more!
I say "NO" to stealing any money from anyone and giving it to other people for free!

Fighting against the climate change? I understand this is a fight against spring and autumn because this is when climate actually changes most ;P

You think it's only a tax on banks, not you or I?
Do you keep all your money in the pocket or in a bank account?
...
Spend 3 seconds thinking about it and you should find the right answer.

I'm from Poland and i know what communism is all about.
I guarantee that if you in Great Britain support such ideas then you will know what COMMUNISM is too.

Just as you don't extinguish the fire with petrol, just as you don't fight economic crisis with additional taxes on banks!

Thank you for attention.

This is a brilliant idea, if you want to destroy the economy, and render the UK a third world country. This is emotional brain-washing, dressing up as "morally good" what is infact no better than common theft.

Banks have just LOST billions. This campaign suggests this "tiny tax" won't hurt them - it will. This tax will force banks to charge everyone else the extra tax that they are paying plus more. It will be the "ordinary" person who will suffer more, by paying more fees and receiving less interest from their bank accounts.

Not enough people realize the service that banks provide - without banks you would have no financing for small businesses, no financing for your mortgage, no credit card, no car leases, no bank accounts, no interest on your savings, no pension fund when you retire, no transmission of monetary policy and the list goes on and on.

It's not a question of *whether* to help the poor, but HOW to help them. Helping the poor is not done by robbing the "rich" (i.e.those who have worked hard and earned their pay.) By doing this, you teach people to become dependent on a Nanny State for handouts, and that robbing their wealthier neighbour is morally right.

Contrary to popular myth, people are by nature, fundamentally good, caring and compassionate. When given freedom to work and earn their pay (and yes, even to generate wealth), people will naturally be motivated to help the poor, through charities, local private support groups etc. Being compassionate and caring shouldn't be forced upon them by government.

It is freedom from taxation, free trade, healthy private business and healthy competition that will ultimately help the poor. This is the only way to generate a better economy which encourages everyone to do better and raises everyone's wealth and standard of living.

I highly recommend reading Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged", which describes what happens to a civilized country when this sort of evil tax is forced upon it. Everyone sinks into a far worse, miserable state - the country becomes backwards and corrupt and everyone sinks into poverty.

This is a brilliant idea, if you want to destroy the economy, and render the UK a third world country. This is emotional brain-washing, dressing up as "morally good" what is infact no better than common theft.

Banks have just LOST billions. This campaign suggests this "tiny tax" won't hurt them - it will. This tax will force banks to charge everyone else the extra tax that they are paying plus more. It will be the "ordinary" person who will suffer more, by paying more fees and receiving less interest from their bank accounts.

Not enough people realize the service that banks provide - without banks you would have no financing for small businesses, no financing for your mortgage, no credit card, no car leases, no bank accounts, no interest on your savings, no pension fund when you retire, no transmission of monetary policy and the list goes on and on.

It's not a question of *whether* to help the poor, but HOW to help them. Helping the poor is not done by robbing the "rich" (i.e.those who have worked hard and earned their pay.) By doing this, you teach people to become dependent on a Nanny State for handouts, and that robbing their wealthier neighbour is morally right.

Contrary to popular myth, people are by nature, fundamentally good, caring and compassionate. When given freedom to work and earn their pay (and yes, even to generate wealth), people will naturally be motivated to help the poor, through charities, local private support groups etc. Being compassionate and caring shouldn't be forced upon them by government.

It is freedom from taxation, free trade, healthy private business and healthy competition that will ultimately help the poor. This is the only way to generate a better economy which encourages everyone to do better and raises everyone's wealth and standard of living.

I highly recommend reading Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged", which describes what happens to a civilized country when this sort of evil tax is forced upon it. Everyone sinks into a far worse, miserable state - the country becomes backwards and corrupt and everyone sinks into poverty.

To bad to many people will see this as a good idea! These are the same stupid questions and answers they got our tax laws started with. It was only supposed to be a "little" tax and it was to be revoked after all the wars were over. That's a lie!

banks are businesses like any other industry... when is everyone going to stop harping on about them?! those that have survived the crisis...well done on them. surely those that didnt cant afford to be paying even more taxes, which will just come back to haunt the public anyway?

A Robin Hood Tax sounds great in principle, but the fact of the matter is the banks will just turn around and recoup their "losses" off the backs of the poor working class.
How naive of these lobbyists to think otherwise!

Poo...wee

An FTT will lead to lower volume (reducing the estimated revenue) and hand in hand with lower trading volume is increased volatility which goes against the very reason this tax is being called for.

Who will suffer from this tax- the poor people of the world thats who.

What a complete load of ideological, flawed, ill-conceived bunkum!

it's nothing more than legalised theft. ooh look - somoeone's made a bit of money and doesn't appear to have worked hard for it and I haven't got it. i know - let's take it away from them.

This is a tax on the notional principal of risk transfer transactions, and it quite simply an inefficient tax that will lead to lower growth rates as hedging transactions become prohibitively expensive. For instance, without these transactions, an Oil company would no longer be able to exchange it's oil price risk with an Airline who is exposed to the opposite risk, thereby providing cost and revenue certainty to both parties. When you implement a tax on this type of transaction, you reduce the attractiveness of the product.

The only thing that will happen is that banks will charge everyone else the extra tax that they are paying plus more, because this is what banks do. In the end, the banks will make just as much money - or more - and we will have to pay even more fees.

I love this concept - I truly do - but we do not live in a world where this will work like it was intended to for long.

.

Maybe we should cosider helping our own country and residents before coming up with gloriied plans to help others. Our next government need to get the country into a much better financial position or very shortly we could be classed as a third world country!

Giving money to poor people keeps them poor. Taxing those who make money to give to people who make no contribution is a little odd to say the least. Who makes money for pension funds, public services, health care? Not the poor. We cannot all live on hand-outs. Global warming is a scam so why rob people to enrich a few.

Banks caused global warming hype by having too much money, causing a critical mass of potential-spending, leading to discrepencies in the quantum phase around the ozone layer on the subatomic level.

What the SHIT are you talking about Global Warming for here? Watch the bloody video!

This is possibly the worst idea I have ever heard. Do you understand anything about economics or finance? This tax would plummet the global economy into a tailspin, requiring that we rename the Great Depression something like the Second Greatest Depression or the First Great Depression...

I don't support the tax because at the end of the day who will end up paying? The consumers. Banks already want to charge us to get our own money out and they certainly wouldn't think twice about passing on the costs of a new tax to us. For pragmatic reasons, the Robin Hood tax doesn't add up.

You do realise that any tax added to them will be added to the interest we have to pay them. I dont support also because its another way for the government to siphen off the economy, and once it gets its foot in the door, it will rise, rise, rise. Just look at the council tax. Bad idea for all the interest paying people of the country!

Rare united front on banking reform
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/fp/Rare+united+front+banking+reform/2940941/story.html

First the Oil sands now this? You lefties must just be hating Canada. Time for another mass campaign to brainwash the youth.

Taxing bank transactions does not equal taxing bankers, it equals taxing all of us in everything we do.

There are better ways.

I share the frustration that not enough is being done to curb this greed and irresponsibility, but the RHT proposals ignore the fact that you and I rely on banks for foreign exchange, for savings, and for credit and mortgages... all of which would be more expensive if the underlying goods they're based on are taxed.

At least the name of the tax exudes honesty as to the action. What was Robin Hood's motto? "Rob from the rich, and give to the poor." Regardless of the amount, this tax, along with all other taxes, is theft.

If the incident portrayed in the video took place in real life, the "hoods" would be prosecuted for theft. Why does this action become moral just because it is done by the government, and supposedly for the benefit of society? I have a better idea. Allow the poor to "take" the money directly from the rich. Can't pay your mortgage or rent this month? You can go to the bank and demand they "give" you enough money to cover your debt. Not enough food in the house? Go to the store, and just "take" what you need. It is not bank robbery or shoplifting, it's "taxation." If it is moral for the government to take by force for its own or another's benefit, it must be moral for the individual to do likewise.

Also, this Robin Hood mentality ignores one simple truth. Ultimately "this small transaction tax" on bankers will be paid by the customers of the bank. Banking corporations, like all corporations, have a responsibility to their shareholders. Additional expenses that would affect the bottom line must be offset by either cost reductions or additional income (fees). If 0.05 percent on billions of bank revenue is considered tiny, then 0.05 percent on hundreds or thousands held in customer accounts is even tinier. So, the bankers would ultimately "share" the responsibility of this tax with its customers. Even poor people have bank accounts, so this "tax" could ultimately adversely affect the pittance they hold on account.

Yes, this Robin Hood Tax sounds noble, but in reality it is just theft that will ultimately hurt those it purports to help.

Well said! I couldn't agree more or have put it better. This whole thing makes my blood boil.

I'm currently reading Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" and learning more about her incredibly insightful philosophy, "Objectivism". Her prophetic novel describes exactly this sort of evil (dressed up as "moral righteousness"), and the results of it? Descent into statist tyranny and misery for all.

When will people wake up and realize that freedom from taxation, free trade, healthy private business and healthy competition is the only way to generate a better economy which encourages everyone to do better and raises everyone's wealth and standard of living?

Helping the poor is not done by teaching people to become dependent on a Nanny State for handouts, and to rob those who have worked hard and earned their pay.

Thank you, Todd, for your eloquent comment - it gives me hope that not everyone has succumbed to the brain-washing of these whingers who want to control the world by restraining those with talent and ability.

please, don't agree with this stupid idea, if you tax some of the highest earners then the economy will get worse because the bankers are spending the most. if you tax the they have less money to spend therefore leading to our countries financial situation getting worse. my dad is a banker and allready 45% of his annual earnings are taken away from him in tax so how is it fair to take anymore. I would just like to strees that our countrys current economic climate is not the fault of the bankers, the fault lies with the idiots who borrowed the money knowing that they would struggle to pay it back. if the bankers refused to give money away to lots of people then they would be introuble with their boses, then the government. I am only 12 and i seem to know a lot more about politics and all than you do. this is a stupid idea and you may have more suppporters at the moment but just remeber how many bankers there are, therfore lots and lots of unhappy people

Wow, you are a very smart and mature 12 year old. Good for you for posting your comment.

I totally agree with you, and you put it very intelligently and eloquently.

When you're a bit older, I highly recommend reading Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged" and learning more about her incredibly insightful philosophy, "Objectivism".

She was a fiction writer and philosopher who wrote 2 amazing novels in the 50s. "Atlas Shrugged" predicted the future -it's turning true today! It describes what happens to a civilized country (such as the USA) when this sort of evil tax (dressed up as "morally good") is forced upon it. Everyone sinks into a far worse, miserable state - the country becomes backwards and corrupt and everyone sinks into poverty.

I hope there are more young people like you, who will help the rest of the world to wake up and realize the truth - that freedom from taxation, free trade, healthy private business and healthy competition are the only ways to create a better economy. These things encourage everyone to do better and raises everyone's wealth and standard of living.

Helping the poor is not done by teaching people to become dependent on a Nanny State for handouts, and to rob those who have worked hard and earned their pay.

Your comment gives me hope. Good luck to you and your family.

i would just like to say that this is discrimination, if you put a tax on people who had ginger hair then that would be considered completely wrong and descrimination against them, so how is thi sany different? you say that this is helping the worl get out of poverty and all but have you really thought that this tax could be making more! if you tax the bankers then some of them may find it hard to support themselves and their famillies this could lead to an increase in poverty. by the way i have sent 3 emails to you now and have been in touch with my local mp(i am 12) and you haven't listened but my mp had! everyone is suposed to be considered equal and by doing this you a proving that people like you still don't belive in equality
it's up to you wether or not you go ahead with this but i would like to point out that there is no need to be rude by not postin any of my 3 comments.

The main idea is brilliant, I agree, what bothers me is that you can't do a tax just on bankers, what about all the other rich people? This sounds unfair, a tax for people with very high income would make more sense. And then there is another problem: It is a fact, that if there were no poor countries and everybody had enough to eat, you wouldn't sit behind your fancy macbooks and read this.

Greatings
Silvio

the RHT is a tax on risky, speculative activity - these transactions are like investments, but more risky - sometimes there are major profits, sometimes there are major losses. The effect of the tax would be to inhibit this kind of activity - a good thing for the stability of the financial sector. So why is the RHT's main emphasis on raising £billions to conquest 'poverty and the environment' - so you want speculation to continue unabated and good causes to profit from it? In which case, all you are doing is taking, and not effecting any change. It is a stable economic system we need to stop businesses in this country falling apart.

Communists

Nobody has a right to take anything from anyone else. I am in fact, middle class. But that does not entitle me to someone else's money because I know what is right for the "better good".

If that line of logic worked then all of government spending would produce perfect results.

If the Robin Hood tax got started, it would go the ways of all other taxes. Getting higher and higher when "utopia" doesn't crop up magically because of taking lots of money and spending lots.

Read Austrian economics. Read Ludwig von Mises and Henry Hazlitt and wake up!!!!

I like your comment, Tom. I too am a student of Austrian economics and a voluntarist.

Violence does not beget virtue. The State is nothing more than an institution run by a minority that claim the moral right to initiate force/violence against the majority. Note I said "initiate", not "defend". Nothing virtuous can spring forth from this premise.

What kind of society with the following moral premise do we want to live in?

a) Everyone steals from everyone else.
b) The few steal from the many.
c) No one steals from anybody.

The civilized choice is (c). If I recognize I cannot claim the moral right to steal from you, and you recognize you cannot steal from me, and we both agree that it is universally preferable we'd want to live in a society where it was condemned/wrong to steal from each other, why do we delegate this "non-right" to steal from each other to a third party - the State?

Government cannot redistribute wealth without redistributing impoverishment. Why? Because it creates no wealth of its own. In fact, in can only exist by removing wealth from others and redistribute to those pandering for the loot, less its cut, waste, scandals, boondoggles, gold-plated pensions, bureaucracy, and inefficiency. It's a negative sum game.

People say, "We need the State to protect person and property!". What they don't see is in order for the State to exist, it must first *INITIATE* force against the very persons they are "protecting" and deciding how much property they take...and how much we get to keep.

You're right. We need to wake up.

I agree! And read Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged"!

Ayn Rand was a fiction writer and philosopher who wrote 2 amazing novels in the 50s. Her best one, "Atlas Shrugged" predicted the future - it's turning true today! It describes what happens to a civilized country (such as the USA) when this sort of evil tax (dressed up as "morally good") is forced upon it. Everyone sinks into a far worse, miserable state - the country becomes backwards and corrupt and everyone sinks into poverty.

We need to start educating young people in economics - it should be on the national school curriculum. Then they wouldn't be duped into believing in something this disturbing and backwards.

Sorry, I'm with Charles Day on this one.

5 idealistic but ignorant youngsters extract money from someone with threats, and then make it worthless.

Is this video supposed to be pointing out what's stupid about the whole idea?

The current Labour government is basing its own election campaign on cutting tens of billions of wasted public spending without impacting jobs or services. Who in their right mind would want to make banking and international trade more expensive in order to keep money flowing down the public sector toilet?

If you think banking and international trade are evil things that need to be punished then swap your car for a donkey and go and live in Albania, and take the multi-multi-multi millionaires Richard Curtis and Ben Kingsley with you.

Banks pledged their proper banking assets for none-banking activities.

Banks have just LOST billions - primarily for none-banking activities. Is it seriously suggested that to tax them will help the Banks to recover ?

Outlaw their none-banking activities instead - and tax individual bankers earnings of £0.5m+ at 90%

Tax at 90% are you insane, what an incentive for hard work that is, and brilliant idea if you want to destroy an entire sector of the economy! I think too many people are forgetting the Value of intermediation that banks provide, and without banks you would have no financing to entrepreneurs, no financing for your mortgage, no credit card , no car leases , no bank accounts, no interest, on your savings, no pension fund when you retire , no transmission of monetary policy and the list goes on an on maybe you should wake up!

If this tax became law I wonder how long it would take the banks to relocate to another country. The UK would ensure it's place as a future third world economy. Do you really think a (even a Labour) government would put itself a situation like that. I don't think so. The Banks would make the government pay more interest on the loans they needed to get out of this mess, taxes would rise, etc.

+1 - "We do not need more taxes. Taxes empower bureaucrats and governments. We need FREEDOM. Empower the INDIVIDUAL! Freedom worldwide."

I understand the idea and support it in principle; but it is naive and idealistic. To imagine that the bankers, who are basically the true power brokers in this world, would really suffer any penalty from such a tax, is naive; they would simply pass on the costs to their customers, that is you and I and the already stretched small businesses upon which our fragile economies rely.
Fifty years of Communism should have finally convinced us that ideology, whilst fine in principle, cannot work in a world full of greedy, selfish individuals who regard themsleves as above ordinary humanity.
We have yet to find the answer to this perrenial problem.

Naive, won't work- will be passed on the masses anyway .

why should it go to climate change. climate change is natural. no amount of money will stop it. man made globule warming is a moneymaking con

Taxes are, by definition, an economically inefficient way to manipulate markets. This is only another tax that will be passed on to the public and make it much more costly for companies to hedge risk through legitimate and effective tools such as financial derivatives. Very naive idea.

This tax could work, but only if it was international law. If it was the law in one country say UK, and not USA then the banks would move their trade to other countries and the UKs economy would suffer.
I am not against it, but it is not the perfect solution, there is always a wider picture.

We do not need more taxes. Taxes empower bureaucrats and governments. We need FREEDOM. Empower the INDIVIDUAL! Freedom worldwide. People keeping more of their own money (i.e. private property) empowers them at the roots level,in one's own neighborhood where better decisions are made.

Don't blame the UK finance system. It had a good ride being an international finance centre, not a leech on UK citizens. It's on its uppers because it was sold turkeys by the US mortgage industry. UK plc has had to step in briefy but even it will turn a tidy profit when it sells its stake off. This goose lays golden eggs. Wake up to that instead of trying to cling on to teenage idealism.

People are just jealous that bankers are making more money then them.

I do not care if people blame them for messing up the economy, it should now teach people who do not have a great amount of money not to spend that money on stupid things. This is a joke and another reason for celebrities to try an influence politics - UN.

To help all of those already affected by the climate change caused by those evil, devoped nations, right?
I'm in the Central U.S.. My state was under a glacier during the last ice age, and that glacier is still receding. (Evidence, the Great Lakes). This climate has been changing since and will continue to change through our futures. So, the 1% of carbon dioxide that we contribute today is the deciding factor in climate change? If we stop burning fossil fuels, will the mammoths return? What "stasis" is the right one?
Is any "climate stasis" even plausible, given their lack of support throughout all of history's evidence. We're getting hotter, and we will get colder again. Spend your money on research making alternative energy competitive, and this entire conversation would be moot.
Using it as a vehicle for "equalizing wealth" is absurd. And to "tax the bank transactions" just means taking a percentage of every cent that I spend or earn. Thinking that the banks will just eat the fee and not pass it on to all consumers is asinine.
Well, I'm sure that a lot of your viewers will just "baah" like easily led sheep

You asked me to vote - I voted - you are worse than the sodding EU asking for another referendum - I dont want to change my mind. and PS dont hijack the color green with your hoodies - its already been hijacked and its meaningless. I think your video is pretentious crap and threatens violence all the way through. "

Banks, like all businesses do not pay taxes! Their customers pay the taxes as part of the cost of the products and services that the businesses provide!

Do you people understand anything about economics? Sorry, that was a rhetorical question.

American banks have returned every cent they were given in bailouts PLUS 8 1/2%! The American Government has made a PROFIT on the bailout. If you leave your system alone, it'll heal itself as well. Muck it up with taxes, no matter what the size, and you're causing the pain of economic recession to continue for longer than necessary.

In my opinion, the banks would just, as any other business would do, transfer the fee´s onto the customers. We need to find a way to reduce the net profit results and transfer that money into mentioned establishments.

The best of intentions - but it won't work in practice. Why would any banks continue to operate in a country if they are likely to pay billions more of pounds of tax? There are many, many thousands of jobs and billions of tax revenues already paid in the UK from the banking sector that would be substantially diminished when the banks relocate to anywhere such a tax does not apply i.e. New York, Geneva, Singapore.

do you really think I'd trust my money to YOU THUGS?

Taxes are, by definition, an economically inefficient way to manipulate markets. This is only another tax that will be passed on to the public and make it much more costly for companies to hedge risk through legitimate and effective tools such as financial derivatives. A noble but naive idea.

I agree to the tax if it supports only British poor & climate issues. Charity starts at home. It's time we sorted out our own before others.

Oh I'm all for the tax I just thought the video was horribly repetitive. Bill Nighy is a great actor but the script...seriously!

Why all of the new taxes? Our income is taxed, our capital gains are taxed, any time we buy something, that is taxed. Petrol is taxed, cigarettes are taxed, eating out in a restaurant is taxed. Paying a doctor or a lawyer their fees, that's taxed when we pay it. Paying a mobile phone bill is taxed. And if we tax the banks, whose employees pay lots of tax already, we might lose those people and those banks to other jurisdictions. And then we will lose a lot of tax.

If you really want to make the country a better place, why don't you stop enslaving us with all these taxes, and let everyone take a bit of responsibility for their own lives?

Won't banking just be done abroad?

This is the kind of tax based on envy. Yes, ENVY! Envy on people who were able to make a fortune, and I am refering here only to those who made it fair and square, by convincing others to pay them in exchange for the producs/services/talents.

I sounds to me like those who didn't make it in selling their abilities to others and make a fortune are now trying to pull the one who did back into the places they started from.

I am not debating whether a small (by what measure?) tax on banks, rich men or companies, etc, would generate a large amount of money to be used on morally high-valued objectives. But where is the fairness on imposing such a tax on some people/organizations only on the basis that they can pay it?

A transaction tax is ineffective because the institutions involved will just find new ways of exchanging money while avoiding the definitions of a transaction which would incur the tax. Billions of pounds would be devoted to solving this problem, as well as processing the tax transactions, and that is an unproductive use of money. In the end all money goes to people, and that is who should be taxed. Taxing business is a distortion and is only still around because of the international economy. Imputation credits and other relatively simple tax equalising instruments deal with the practical reality of that global 'Mexican stand-off' on company tax - but ideally (and I believe eventually) the only taxes on business would be those which deal in national assets and inter-generational equality, like mining/drilling and environmental risk mitigation.
Taxing consumers works as a primary source of revenue for governments simply because we have no choice but to consume, and the average consumer does not have the resources to efficiently avoid such taxes. Some money can be devoted to monitoring and punishing the worse-behaved among businesses and consumers, and works as a deterrent as well.
In the end it comes down to how much money a government has available to spend on worthy social/environmental programs. They should look for the most efficient way to get it - the Robin Hood Tax is not efficient. A flat consumption tax will disadvantage the poorest among us, however we already have excellent transfer mechanisms to deal with that; it requires an adjustment in the transfer (increase in family payments, pensions etc.) and any disadvantage is removed. Any tax which discourages business activity does not get my vote.

you are too naive, in our system it all runs down to the costumer finally...

They'd all go to Switzerland where they are warmly welcome

As the colonists pointed out in Boston harbour, the difference between Extortion and Taxation is Representation. Until companies are properly represented in our political process we shouldn't be surprised when they try to buy influence.
We shouldn't have bailed out the banks and we shouldn't tax them either: just let the stand (or fall...) on their own merits.

Just can not get my head round the numbers - take £200 billion out of UK banking and that is all the profit gone from every bank? Is that what you want?

What a pointless waste of neurons.

Companies are adept at avoiding tax. In this case you would just cripple the cityh of London as everyone moved to a different country. That is assuming it would even be "legal" under EU legislation.

Great you've got some stars to back your idea, but they aren't economists, and they've clearly been duped by some simple maths which appears to have no basis in reality

Tax is a restriction of civil liberties. Why does the government think it can better spend money than the individual? It cannot, not now not in the future. It bailed out the banks in the first and failed to see the mess coming.

Just because you can couch the terms of this tax in minimalist terms (.05% or .005%) and show how much money it would raise, does not make it a good idea. If such a small amount can raise so much money, why not just make it simple 1% tax? Then you could raise literally trillions of dollars, and we wouldn't need any other income from any other tax.... we just make the banking industry pay for everything. Brilliant, right? Massively stupid and shortsighted is more like it. they will just get the money from everyone (you and me) by raising fees and lowering interest rates on every investment they handle or process. You know what the Robin Hood Tax doesn't understand? It doesn't take into account that if you keep taxing the so-called rich, pretty soon there are no more rich people available to be soaked..... they move away, and they take their money with them. Then what are we left with? The solution is not a lack of taxes.... the solution is to cut spending. THEN we would find out what people REALLY want and need from the government.

Oh great idea, take from the rich and give to the poor! Communism doesn't work. If you want to propose something useful, support a non socialist plan to tax the banks in order to reduce the national deficit. Then (when we're not a broke country) we can start giving money charitably.

You already owe your debts to your own economy, which means your debts are in your face right now, decreasing your currency´s value. Simpletist analogies to communism do not help in this debate.
Ever thought about what might be wrong about people investing only 1% of their time at the same skill average and netting 1000% more profit? You´re voting for market exploitation paying off instead of labor or labor-preventing mechanisms paying off. Which means, you´re damaging the net economy on behalf of semi-religious terms such as communism and socialism.
Besides, I voted No on the proposed idea.

think this through people

100s of billions of profit? thats taking a huge chunk out of the profits for banks, not to mention the fact it would make many, many, many deals unfeasible, a lot of speculative deals only make minute percentage profits as it is, and only large numbers of these all involving large sums of money makes them profitable

In addition to this, even if you think it is feasible for our banks on a national scale, think of the impact globally, our banking sector is one of the most powerful globally, and is not something we should jeapordise by making less competitive.

We've been thinking this through. The bankers haven't yet made it to the timeout chair. History tells us their system is in need of a restructuring as a reassessment of it is still great on the horizon. Money reform hasn't yet made it's impact on the platform of discussions of a tax on the bankers. The fox in the coop is not yet forgotten~

Are people on drugs or simply delusional? How do you expect to raise "Hundreds of billions" from organisations that do not make that type of money each year? You want to tax the transaction they do instead...Oh give me a break..Also, have you any idea of how much is actually spent on the NHS and the Education system and is simply spunked away as wasted money...TENS of billions is the answer. Deal with the wastage that goes on in the management of the NHS and the Education system

It never ceases to amaze me how myopic people can be, they hug a tree, they believe the bull from some people with clear political agendas, and they think they know all the answers. Why should we give our money to others, lets sort this bloody country out first. It is this liberal and leftish rubbish that is ruining this country.

Have you all forgotten, or conveniently ignored the revelations about the anthropogenic climate change argument..the fact that the data was "contrived" to fit the model desired and the Jones will lose his job and be censured by the Scientific community, does this not matter to you...??

I also hate to burst your bubble...ROBIN HOOD WAS A FICTIONAL CRIMINAL.

This is a great idea! The governments of the world have proven themselves such prudent managers of financial resources that we should give them even more money. I am sure that the governments will allocate this money as fairly as Mother Teresa would. After all, most governments are truly controlled by the common man and not elite insiders. I am inspired by this thoughtful website!

I watched the video. 0.05% doesn't sound like much no. Perhaps people don't realise that on many flow transactions banks make about 0.005% on the deal. Thats right - a tenth of the charge per transaction the video is suggesting. They do this because there is competition out there which would charge less if the bank wished to charge more. It comes down to this simply - if we start charging like this on these kinds of tight margins - our banks will lose business to other european centres. Perhaps Geneva would become the next Investment banking centre. And then we would lose all the tax (corporation, NI, income) from this huge industry Britain survives on (we are now a tertiary nation now afterall). This tax driven by public sentiment is a bad idea. Banking has been attracted here in the first place as the rest of Europe is so heavy in terms of taxation already.

I initially gave my support to this idea but I have changed my mind. This is an unfair tax. Two wrongs don't make a right. If the banks are doing something which is unethical they should stop doing it - period. Introducing a tax is saying they can (partially at least)buy their way out of unethical practices. The central banking system of the world needs to be scrutinized wholesale before *any* action is taken. That should be the first step of every citizen of every country - to reach for an understanding of how their economies are controlled and by whom. Awareness is the key here and taxation doesn't solve the problem. Awareness will, though.

Just a quick "initial thought" thing here.

Any tax, ANY tax, given to the high up bank employees will simply be pushed onto the banks customers. If suddenly they all expect to lose the same amount of money, it'll be commonplace to just push it on as an added expense. (While at the same time, if this policy varies from bank to bank then the scheme would fail.)
Basically what this idea seems to be is "I want to pay more money to charity through a third part."
It's rather stupid.

If you don't like "fat cats", who due to the money they earn already pay a lot of tax into the Governments coffers, then tax their bonuses. This so-called "Robin Hood" tax will hit some wealthy investors but it will also hit your own pension funds which have already been shrunk by this Government.
A new tax means more administration, more public sector workers, more extortionate public sector pensions so you'll be paying twice through the tax system.
When the Government gets hold of this money you have no control over it and there's no guarantee that 100% of it will go where you want it to go. Did you know before today that they gave £18million to the Unite union?!
The best and most efficient way of getting your money to those you want to help is to donate to a charity working in that area. There are plenty of them as you can see from this web site.
Keep the Government's grubby hands off your money.

its all very well taxing banks like this, but unless it is universally global it will destroy one of the last truely world class parts of the British economy. Additionally the £200bn has to come, ultimatley,out of the pockets of the shareholders who are the institutions everyone of us rely on to provide us with financial support in our later lives.

No doubt this robin hood tax initiative is funded by the very banking institutions it claims to oppose. A fund for climate change? The AGW myth was invented by the banking families and they, along with their minions such as Al Gore, are going to do very nicely out of it thank you very much. Make no mistake folks the robin hood tax will mean further driving the tax payers of the (current) first world further into poverty, as has always been the intention.

Banks are (almost) the World's best evaders of tax, moral responsibility and common sense (beaten only by politicians and civil servants). Does anyone really believe the banks would be daft enough to conduct business in a way that resulted in them paying this tax? It would simply result in yet another army of Government employees being employed (or diverted from potentially useful work) to waste taxpayers' money chasing the end of a rainbow.

stupid bunch of dirty hippies. banking already generates more tax than many other industries. throwing money at poor countries solves nothing. if only you lot could look up from your copy of the guardian without looking down your nose at everyone else then you'd realise that actually, if you did a bit of work between you that you may actually be able to make a REAL difference to this world.

Wake up, America!
This is just another, slight-of-hand, taxation "without representation" way to tax every American in the United States. Don't kid yourselft, banks are going to get their money, one way or the other. The banks will up their fees on every little item, checks, debit fees, calls to the bank for information, and possibly for just walking into the bank and waiting in line. There is no more "free popcorn". By the time we pay for everybodies ills, in this country, there will be no money left to take care of ourselves. But with the rate things are going, this crazy scheme will pass, with or without our blessings. "Hello" to the United States of Socialism and "Good-bye" to Capitalism.

Come on wake up. it's over, forget democracy and capitalism. Do you not realize the amount of damage these criminals have commited with immunity. This idea is childish.

The banks will seek to claw their money back from elsewhere.....you, the banking customer. I dont believe anything that is said about anything these days....I trust my own gut instinct. It will mean the end of free banking, we will pay for every transaction, every standing order, every cheque.....are people so stupid as to think the banks will pay Robin Hood Tax without trying to claw their losses back from elsewhere, to compensate?

Banks and or corporations don't pay taxes, it's all passed on to individual people, this is just another liberal tax that kills productivity, there is nothing anyone can do about climate change anyway, it's not caused by humans ,this whole idea is a total farce.

Banks don't pay taxes?! Please do have a look at where our national income comes from - you'll find that the vast majority of the money that pays for your roads, schools and hospitals is not paid by you, but by the banks and large corporations. Face facts, the quality of living we have today is a direct result of the amount of tax these institutions pay, so please stop complaining.

The consumer will pay for this tax by fee increases imposed by the banks. Keep in mind, they are bankers!

It's the Tobin Tax. And they already tried it before, it's not a brilliant new idea:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobin_tax#Practical_experience_in_implementing_Tobin_taxes_in_the_form_of_general_financial_transaction_taxes

It didn't work out too well. Sweden tried it and the liquidity in the markets dried up. Making every transaction much more expensive. Speculation stopped so there wasn't too much income from this tax. But on the other hand there was way less income in capital gains tax. The government had to of course repeal this stupid tax.

Think it's only for speculators?
1. Everyone who owns a mutual fund, 401k, IRA gets impacted - all transactions in those funds get taxed too, a little builds up over the long term
2. The decreased liquidity makes transactions more expensive, so it's like a double hit. Your mutual fund buys a stock for $10 a share, but can only sell it for $9 a share - bid/ask spread. You just lost 10% because of lack of liquidity.

Everyone will get hit by this, not just speculators. Stop blaming speculators for all your problems anyway. It's a stupid scapegoat thing to do.

I, like hundreds of other ordinary people in the South East, work for a City Bank. Up to now, I have been fortunate enough to keep my job and I hope to keep it that way. I resent the constant views that "Bankers are evil" and earn enormous bonuses. The vast majority of Bank workers earn good but not outrageous salaries and relatively modest bonuses.
It seems to me that the many get to carry the burden of mistakes by the few.

Also, to have this rammed down my throat by a wealthy individual such as Mr Nighy is frankly ridiculous!

The tax on Banks is fine, but remember that Banks employ a vast number of hard working, modestly paid, ordinary people

I suppose the idea of this campaign is not to discredit hard-working bank employees on a justified salary, even though it might imply certain moral consequences for working for certain businesses.
Rather it seems to be targeted at corporations yielding net profits off damaging the overall economy.

There are several issues with this idea.
1) Are we going to tax everyone we think is overpaid? Who decides this, what's the criteria? It is ironic that Bill Nighy, a very well paid actor, is telling us who should be giving their money away.

2) As many people have pointed out, they'd probably just pass the charge on to consumers anyway.

3) This is country is obsessed with black and white accountability. Banks contributed to this crisis, but it is governments that instructed banks to lend to people they really shouldn't have been lending to and pushed vast amounts of deregulation through so they could ride the gravy train, estate agents that sold houses to people who couldn't afford them, and credit rating agencies that rated these groups of mortgages as AAA, (i.e. saying they're as likely to default as the government!).

Personally I think the govt should focus on long term ideas rather than revenge schemes, like an insurance premium for banks so that they can bail themselves out in future and sensible regulation.

Also:
i) Banks don't JUST employ traders! A bank like JPM would have maybe 10% as traders and investment bankers. The rest are tech, ops, finance (i.e. risk management and accountants) and services. The term 'banker' is misused, personal bugbear.
ii) Something like the top 10% of earners pay 50% of all income tax. To say all tax is paid by people at the bottom is not true. It's just if you're earning less, it will inevitably feel like more.

Ultimately all tax is paid by the people at the bottom of the pyramid. Do we really think that the Banks won't all just raise a fee on a transaction to cover this tax, which will hit the traders, which hits the pension pots of ordinary people (admittedly as well as a rich few)? Indeed I cannot think of one tax that has made the world a better place - somehow the money never quite gets to where it should. I am not proposing we do nothing (how about enforced margin restrictions on banks - i.e. the difference between their saving and lending rates), but taxes only aid the bureaucratic machine.

If you want to go after the High Frequency Algorithims that offer nothing to the market, then I agree. Tax them! But don't tax the small guys that make a living in the market trading.

It is the High Frequency trading firms such as Goldman that cause all of the voliatility and wild swings in the market, not speculators who are in for more than 5 seconds.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS IS A SMOKESCREEN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bad Bad idea. Take it from the politicians wages these are the main cause of the problem we have now, not the banks. The banks are a scap goat for these idiots.

Charity is charity - Tax is tax. I can decide which charity to give to I can't stop taxes being used to bail out the banks.

Robin Hood fought against the taxman. It's an insult to use his name.

Dismantling Glass Steagall was vandalism. It led directly to the theft of the many by the few. A tax on bankers is now like taxing a burglar. Why no prosecutions for Basel II accord breaches? Why remove Glass Stegall? Why are ordinary people bailing out private investment?

More bureaucracy would mean more Sir Humphreys to operate it - good for employment figures perhaps but not for the public purse.

The banks would simple pass on the costs to customers as increesed servise charges.

I'm a student and even I know that!

I think more thought is necessary here..

Lefties are always looking for news ways of taxing us.

The wheels are coming off the Climate Tax wagon - so the hit the bankers. Twats.

A very factually based point you make. Care to elaborate on any of your statements? I suppose in your opinion everyone should just write "Twats" in the comments = that´s gonna solve all our problems; glad to have you around. Let´s abandon this website, now that the situation has been concluded.

The banks should not have been given a bailout in the first place. Government handouts now hold banks hostage so that they are obligated. The banks will then pass that cost on to the consumer. It is yet another subtle move of the government to control more and more of the people's capital. Shame on them for bailing out the banks in the first place. And shame on them for raising taxes yet again.

It does suck that tax payers money bailed out greedy bankers who quite frankly have only got themselves to blame for the whole mess. But if the goverment hadn't have bailled them out the banks would have gone out business and we'd be in a worse mess than we are now. Every person would loose all the money they had saved with that bank for the average person this wouldn't be a problem because theres a goverment insurance up to, I think, £30,000 but if they had more than that on the bank they would loose everything about the goverment insurance mark. Think how much businesses have in them, they would loose millions and hundreds of businesses would also go out of business. Then the problem snow balls those business who banked with that bank stop trading with other businesses which causes them to suffer and perhaps not survive.

Not to mention every loan would be re-called if the bank went under