Good morning , since lloy's peak at 89p ,it has now dropped about 40+% , without the downturn kicking in yet.when that does happen common sense dictates the fall should be greater than 40% , touching the low 30's , hence the need to look back on a longer time period
mick. To watch a recorded version would be easier but I've never liked watching recordings..except Match of the Day of course. Something's lost. We certainly do have a light for the stairs,two infact. I put the table lamp on. I wasn't being being serious but you'd have to know me better than what you see on here to know I can be a bit mischievous in that respect. What's always amazed me is how people don't see that. Just for the record in case you thought I was being serious again, I don't have fluorescent slippers either..Lol. Sorry Wids…Lol
Here's my kind of humour. For breakfast I had eggs,bacon, sausages, tomatoes, hash browns,black pudding,fried bread two fried eggs and toast with margarine, I have margarine 'cos I'm on a diet. ..and say it with a straight face. There you go.
Anyway, I'd say the audience were more supportive of Clinton than Trump. What did come across was that Trump seems to struggle at expressing himself in an articulate manner..like George W. He used words that I'm sure aren't in the US vocabulary..like biggerley. Biggerley ? Does it have an e at the end ? No idea,I've never heard of it. I think he meant major,very important or 'the emphasis is on…
His emphasis was on his business experience in relation to world-wide deals. As a statesman he didn't cut the mustard but I think most people know that .On the other hand Hillary did have gravitas. Trump ,or his advisors, should have known better than to suggest that Clinton didn't have stamina (referring to the coughing bout no doubt) because she came right back at him listing all the travelling she's done world-wide and the hours and hours spent in front of Congressional hearings re.. those Emails and Libya.Trump stated that many high ranking military personnel had just endorsed him as had the police federations.
He laid a lot of emphasis on the points raised by yourself mick and leapfrog below this post in relation to wealth creators.
It was interesting to see ,will I watch the next two,October the 9th. and 19th ? Not sure. It's the first live debate I've watched in their politics as I don't do 'middle of the night' very well.
YES - The other side of the coin that many don't appreciate or choose to ignore when criticising anybody who has risked their own capital to become wealthier either by design or by accident ( the farmer). Labour's current regime proposes a new wealth tax, higher corporation tax, higher personal tax rate taxes for the wealthy ect .... to fuel their vast spending plans. Inevitably leading to an exodus of capital leaving the UK, together with overtaxed businesses closing down. Result massive job losses. Denis Healey tried this in the 1970's with his 98% top tax rate to howls of anguish....shortly to be followed by the IMF when Britain came close to insolvency. Lo! Cheers leapfrog.
The idea of hitting the creators of wealth by taxation on static assets will in the short and long term lead to a poorer standard of living as wealth flees the countries that hit it for extra taxation. A farmer who has several hundred acres of land which need money to maintain in a productive mode barely makes a living yet is extraordinarily wealthy in the value of his land~ A landlord that has a decent property folio has to maintain them to a reasonable standard and pay the mortgage + running costs including voids will soon stop expansion of his folio if costs mount up too much.
Legislation alone has driven up the costs of building by some 40%+so even minimum extra taxation will stop small business building programmes in their tracks.
If lower transportation food and fuel costs are required then the gov.should re nationalises on a non profit basis~ in 2020 the world starts running out fuel reserves ~ third of this countries food is imported by the use of fuel.
Not long ago In KWAZulu where a profit cannot be made~ means for example stocks of medical supplies or anything else for that matter cannot be held ~ they have to be ordered and paid for when required~ get poison in a cut it could be 3 days before treatment is ordered paid for and delivered.
Such legislation which hits the wealth creators leads to a lazy state ~ UK workers are getting known as the laziest workers in Europe because of soft state support which has nil draconian about it. So no wonder those who have not contributed to our taxation want to get into mainland UK,those that do use our health system,our housing etc., for free ! I have to pay.
Too much extra taxation would wipe half the stock market population of risk investors overnight,consider the long term effect on pensions. ~ A gov. controlled pension loses half its value over its life time in fees imagine what extra taxation would do to that easy target
Many more things are created by wealth~ lose the wealth who ends up paying the extra tax~
Those cancer cures being searched for ? It is wealth that can afford the cost of failure no one else.etc.,
Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look.
While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.