Are you really that clueless ?

The short answer to both questions is usually "yes". Anyone not on the kind of defined benefits pension plan beloved of government workers and the industry-destroying parasitic unions gets their money from an investment portfolio of some kind. Nearly all investment portfolios are actively managed to maximize returns and balance risks, which means that they constantly added and remove stocks, bonds and other assets as market conditions change. And the fund managers charge fees for this stuff. Any increase to the cost of trading will be passed on to investors in the form of increased management fees.
.
Or did you think these things were done with unicorns and rainbows at no cost to anybody?

Yes indeed. A tiny transaction tax hits "pensioners"... not day traders and speculators making thousands of trades every week

Just as a slightly higher tax on million-dollar incomes will devastate "small business and job creators."

Keep saying it, guys. I'm pretty sure the public is buying it ;-)

"most trades are done on behalf of pension portfolio's"

Um, what? I highly, highly doubt this is true. Do you have any actual evidence showing that it is true?

I should point out that private businesses - such as say, Goldman Sachs - do a tremendous amount of proprietary trading. Are you keeping this in mind when making such claims?

Pensioners will barely notice this tax, but high-volume institutional and day traders? Oh, yes, they certainly will notice it, which is the entire point. The fee is a good idea and it should be implemented.

You are absolutely right that the transaction tax will hurt the speculators and day traders. However, those day traders and speculators making their thousands of trades every week are responsible for keeping prices aligned across related markets, keeping the bid/ask spreads small, and providing liquidity. Tax their transactions and they go away, making markets less efficient, less liquid, and ultimately more expensive for users, like the pensioners (or those managing their money). So, go ahead and stick it to the finance industry with a transaction tax; just don't be surprised when your 401(k) also tanks as a result.

I work at a trading firm, so yes, I know lots of professional traders. Do you know any?

When you tax an activity, less of that activity will occur. Which I assume is your motive, because you have decided that financial transactions are the root of all evil. Trading won't go away, but it will become more expensive. Firms like mine will likely need to trade less and charge users more (via a larger bid/ask spread) to compensate for a financial transaction tax. That's assuming we can survive -- some firms will probably fold as a result of a transaction tax, and some traders will be out of work. But isn't that your goal? Less financial activity and less profit for financial firms? That will fix all our problems, right?

Ultimately, if a transaction tax is imposed, users of the markets will have to pay more not only due to the tax, but due to the secondary effects of market inefficiency, liquidity, and increased spreads. Taxation has consequences. You are welcome to favor this tax, but please recognize the consequences.

"Do you honestly believe that nobody changes their behavior when their costs change?"

Unless they change substantially, no. Research has shown this to be true time and time again. Just look into the amount commodity prices have to change before people start adjusting their base behaviors by more than a tiny amount.

Wait, what am I saying? You repeatedly displayed that you don't care at all about truth, accuracy, facts, or the historical record. But you're heavily invested in spreading lies and false assertions online, where you're never required to back anything up and can always just abandon the conversation when it is pointed out that you are incorrect.

Just a waste of everyone's time as usual...

Do you honestly believe that companies do not pass their costs on to their customers?

Do you also believe in unicorns?

This is not the Robin Hood tax, it is the Sheriff of Nottingham tax. Robin Hood stole from the government, the sheriff in that case, and gave to the citizens. This new tax takes from the citizens and gives to the government to spend as they see fit. What kind of bizarro world is it that would name this the Robin Hood tax. Oh I remember the masses are asses.