Date: 2016-02-13 18:46 Subject:
Re: HRC financial proposal
Two thoughts for discussion:
1. There may be some real upside to going specific on risk fee. Even though I realize that goes against the grain as it is more HRC detail and builds on an Obama proposal: except for this: it will lead to lots of estimates of how much it will cost the major banks that our fee focuses on. So with detail you could get discussion like will HRC's proposal mean Goldman and JP owe $8 billion or $18 billion. Worse things for us. Worth considering.
2. As you guys know, I was for doing a broad thin FTT for Middle class retirement savings or Social Security as a major Wall Street pays for Main Street proposal and a way to blunt the critique that an FTT would hurt stock market and thus retirement savings, and HRC had seemed open to that formulation. As it would clearly help in primary - I am glad we will discuss again. Though I do worry about Shapiro's worry that at this point, we may look like we are just copying Bernie -- so would have to add it to the calculation. But either way, I think it is may be to our upside to consider details to what is clearly our proposal -- Wall Street Risk fee.
(Added other Mikes and David)
Sent from my iPhone