Jump to content

Budget


buctootim

Recommended Posts

Agreed. Dividends were never intended to be subsitutes for salaries/payments for work performed and there are lots of wholly unimpressive contractors throughout the land taking home far more than their talent commands through use of "service company" tax avoidance structures.

 

The problem is that a lot of businesses have variable income/profits and don't know how much they can pay themselves until the end of the year.

 

However you look at it its a tax increase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Georgie Porgie selling our RBS shares for a billion pound loss

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33769906

Or, to paraphrase it without Tory bashing spectacles....

 

"Acting upon advice from the governor of the Bank of England, chancellor slightly reduces stake in RBS from 78.3% to 72.9% in order to stimulate growth thus raising the chances of being able to sell future stakes at a profit."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or, to paraphrase it without Tory bashing spectacles....

 

"Acting upon advice from the governor of the Bank of England, chancellor slightly reduces stake in RBS from 78.3% to 72.9% in order to stimulate growth thus raising the chances of being able to sell future stakes at a profit."

 

Nah, Prefer Badger's version, :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or, to paraphrase it without Tory bashing spectacles....

 

"Acting upon advice from the governor of the Bank of England, chancellor slightly reduces stake in RBS from 78.3% to 72.9% in order to stimulate growth thus raising the chances of being able to sell future stakes at a profit."

And how does selling 5.4% stimulate growth? It's still majority owned by the state

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And how does selling 5.4% stimulate growth? It's still majority owned by the state

 

That is the view of the people that know about these things, apparently. I believe it's to do with freeing up ownership in the bank.

 

I think we need to rake a global view about these bank bailouts, we may take a small loss on one deal but regain it elsewhere. There has been some debate about the overall net cost of the rescues and it appears to be approximately neutral, give or take a few billion :eek:. We have go a lot of our money back over the last through years through fees and charges. We shall see, it should keep economists busy for another decade or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't G Brown pilloried for selling off gold on the cheap?

 

Indeed he was. In this instance I still cannot see any valid reason ffor it but this might be one: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/thomaspascoe/100018367/revealed-why-gordon-brown-sold-britains-gold-at-a-knock-down-price/

 

It was sold on the cheap and he/we made sure it was even cheaper than it needed to be. It took 3 years or so for the surge in the gold price to make this sale look as weird as it does today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it a bit OTT to hammer GO for selling shares at a loss - maybe Alistair Darling paid too much for them (in fact I am sure he did). The irony is if RBS shares now fall to £2, everyone will be kicking him for not selling more.

 

Everyone is a sh1t hot share trader with the benefit of hindsight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it a bit OTT to hammer GO for selling shares at a loss - maybe Alistair Darling paid too much for them (in fact I am sure he did). The irony is if RBS shares now fall to £2, everyone will be kicking him for not selling more.

 

Everyone is a sh1t hot share trader with the benefit of hindsight.

 

My mrs has a few RBS shares and wishes she had sold them 10 years ago :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And how does selling 5.4% stimulate growth? It's still majority owned by the state

 

You're probably better off asking Mark Carney that question as it was his recommendation and he knows slightly more about this financial malarkey than I do (difficult to believe I know) :)

 

What's you're alternative approach to stimulating the market so that the shares can be sold at a profit. Leaving 78.3% of the bank stagnating in government hands doesn't sound like the best approach to me.

Edited by trousers
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're probably better off asking Mark Carney that question as it was his recommendation and he knows slightly more about this financial malarkey than I do (difficult to believe I know) :)

 

What's you're alternative approach to stimulating the market so that the shares can be sold at a profit. Leaving 78.3% of the bank stagnating in government hands doesn't sound like the best approach to me.

 

That was G Brown's argument for selling the gold, wasn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was G Brown's argument for selling the gold, wasn't it?

 

The situations are not comparable.

 

Is the gold actually there anyway? Nobody is allowed inside Fort Knox to check the US holdings:

 

http://www.wallstreetdaily.com/2013/07/16/fort-knox-gold/

 

http://moneymorning.com/2015/05/12/is-there-gold-at-fort-knox/

Edited by Whitey Grandad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...