• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Oh Dear: 750,000 more to bought into 40% tax threshold...

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Originally posted by Moscow Mule View Post
    Bulltulip. This country is in a black hole because of socialist profligacy. Increasing the structural deficit during boom years is a really tulip idea.
    Agree
    ...my quagmire of greed....my cesspit of laziness and unfairness....all I am doing is sticking two fingers up at nurses, doctors and other hard working employed professionals...

    Comment


      #32
      Okay, yes running deficits during good years is a bad idea. Any economist knows that - and I think el Gordo had to modify his Golden Rule didn't he? But much of the deficit and debt has been caused by bailing out - to eye watering levels - the banks. Who've said "thank you, now f**k off". They didn't really need to fully bail out the banks...the investment bits could have been left out. But, of course there is a revolving door between no10 and The City. Cabinet geezers realise the potential for board seats on banks and large donations could disappear if that happened. I've no doubt the banks are doing what they did before, again.
      McCoy: "Medical men are trained in logic."
      Spock: "Trained? Judging from you, I would have guessed it was trial and error."

      Comment


        #33
        Tha bank bailout was an investment wasn't it? I thought the only reason the banks haven't repayed it yet is because the government wants to hold on to their investment for a while until it grows significantly more.

        Maybe that's why they are allowing the banks to do whatever they have to in order to get the most out of their investment.. Nice trade Darling

        I saw something about some RBS shares being sold back next year though:

        UK may start selling £46 billion RBS stake - report

        UK Financial Investments (UKFI), the body managing Britain's 67 billion pound bank stakes, is not expected to sell them until they are in profit, and not before an independent commission has released a September report on whether banks should be broken up or weakened to improve competition.
        Try explaining that to a bunch of rioting students or daily mail readers...
        "Is someone you don't like allowed to say something you don't like? If that is the case then we have free speech."- Elon Musk

        Comment


          #34
          An investment bought with debt. So...in theory...the govt. will sell its shares and pay off its debt that way.

          Yes I read something in the FT about how the govt. has to decide whether to split the banks (RBS, LLoyds-HBOS, Northern Rock) into separate parts...or let them fatten up before selling them on.

          FT.com / UK / Politics & policy - RBS raises hopes of privatisation

          Choices, choices...
          McCoy: "Medical men are trained in logic."
          Spock: "Trained? Judging from you, I would have guessed it was trial and error."

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by lilelvis2000 View Post
            An investment bought with debt. So...in theory...the govt. will sell its shares and pay off its debt that way.
            A bit like buying a BTL with a 100% mortgage and putting the deposit on a credit card..
            "Is someone you don't like allowed to say something you don't like? If that is the case then we have free speech."- Elon Musk

            Comment

            Working...
            X