EAST BAY CITIZEN. EVERYWHERE SINCE 2009

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Baker on Stark: 'He Can't Be That Stupid'

The Republican nominee for California's 13th Congressional District weighed in on his opponent Rep. Pete Stark and his proposal to levy a 0.005 percent tax on currency transactions used primarily by some of the world's largest financial houses. Here's Forest Baker's comments on H.R. 5783 to the Contra Costa Times' Political Blotter:

Forest Baker, the Republican nominee to challenge Stark in November’s election, calls the idea “pretty crazy.” Though the .005 percent rate seems tiny, he said, it would be constantly compounding to ultimately cost currency traders a tremendous slice of their funds.

“That would never be tolerated by any of those entities, they would simply close those accounts, and that would then cripple the global financial capitalism mechanism of currency trading,” he said. “That would never happen, and Pete Stark has to know that. … It’s astounding to me that such a thing would even be proposed.”

The tax would be “astoundingly burdensome” both upon those on whom its imposed and for those administering it, Baker continued. “He can’t be that stupid, he’s got to be kidding us or playing politics. It’s possible one of his interns wrote that and he said, ‘Yeah, yeah, yeah, submit it.’”
-STEVEN TAVARES

12 comments :

Baker is the idiot those funds do not provide anything but instability and volitility to the markets. Starks plan would help the financial markets by causing less dramatic swings leading to consumer confidence

This guy thinks he can win in a county with high unemployment like this one by making sure Wall Street can keep screwing Main St? Incredible! Sounds like another cakewalk for Fortney.

Stark was a banker before he won his seat; he knows what he's talking about.

I'm with John Vieira on this one; with positions like this, Baker doesn't have a chance in this District.

Doug Jones:

Stark was a banker 38 years ago, are you saying the banking world is the same in 2010 as it was in 1972? To say Stark knows what hes talking about, even though you have no clue what kind of banker, etc, he was, is very oafish of you.

Are you saying a MIT grad knows more about banking because he opened a bank in Walnut Creek (how'd that happen?) almost 40 years ago and in the mean time has been lobbied more then your mouse at midnight?

Are we to believe both you and John know better then Baker, let alone all of us?

Surely, no ones that stupid, err, as stu...wait... arrogant as Stark.

Oh, and so I address the point...Doug, John...in your genius wisdom, tell us how this won't affect the citizens Stark represents?

Here are some like minded dumb asses...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hh6WbFAGdmQ

The timing was precise -- planned to bring further pressure and media attention on the banks just as massive federal regulations, many not yet written, are signed into law.

The scene was mayhem as forty protestors, including several children brought in tow, stormed into the offices of the Chase branch and began chanting, shouting with a bullhorn, and demanding meetings with the bank principals (there were no principals, as it was a sales branch), but that didn’t matter to protesters...because the dumb asses have no clue what they really are doing or saying.

While these parasites are out making no point...people in the building are trying to work...

Nicholas Terry,

I am a Hedge Fund Trader now and I say Starks bill is good, it will cut down on volatility, get the high frequency guys out of the market. They do not add anything good to the mix. Speculators and hedgers will be fine with this

Kahuna:

I doubt many people in his district have ever dealt with a Hedge Fund Trader, but I digress. I did once...bad mistake.

How will this bill better me, then? And...how will consumers not pay for this in the end? What's the protection?

Consumers are paying when the market craters for no reason and then pops back for no reason, people get scared and panic out of markets. Consumer confidence wains and people do not spend. Majority of my trading friends understand why this is necessary.
I doubt you deal with a real hedge fund, access is limited.
Only the elite get to invest in hedge funds, we turned down Michael Jordan because he wanted a deal, he thought we could use his money, didnt need it tod him he would be charged 2% and 25% of profits like everyone else.

Kahuna...access is limited? You're quick to call out what I've dealt with, so I'll refrain from calling out your arrogance. Considering that all I said was that I dealt with a hedge fund...so I guess I'm elite, damn, didn't know that. (Maybe ASK me what I did for a living? Just a thought?)

Again, I ask as a Consumer Affairs Commissioner for this country, how will this better me and like minded, blue collar, just getting by, folks?

Everyone attack him, he's a greedy banker, that reeks of fictitious snobbery.

I guess Kahuna struck it rich or is living it up with the other elitists...oh well.

Post a Comment