Tax as regulation...

I prefer it to taxes as redistribution. Bob Herbert writes about a financial transactions tax for the New York Times:

The economist Dean Baker is a strong advocate of a financial transactions tax. This would impose a small fee — ranging up to, say, 0.25 percent — on the sale or transfer of stocks, bonds and other financial assets, including the seemingly endless variety of exotic financial instruments that have been in the news so much lately.

I give Dean Barker points for calling out Republican Conservatives for being the free-market hypocrites that they are in his booklet The Conservative Nanny State, but his recommendations usually have me rolling my eyes in bewilderment. Still, this financial transaction tax is something I can perhaps get on board with, with some reservation.

Speculation is often used as a dirty word, and it is not. Those who assume financial risk by investing on an educated guess make new businesses, jobs, products, and services possible. These are good speculators. The manic traders described by Herbert would be better labeled as gamblers. They use real-time market information made possible by technology to "flip" securities without adding any value to the market except to line the pockets of stock brokers with commission fees. So I say allow free access to the stock market, make using a broker optional, and then let the US Gov't get some juice from those that like gambling for a living. And for true speculators/investors, waive the tax on the sale if they hold it for a certain period of time.