George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
That may be the case Jezzoo.
You don't do yourself any favours however when in your very next post you talk about self made multi-millionaires.
One anecdote that instantly conflicts with the point you wanted to make.
Quady you do assume a lot to make an argument, How do you know what my friend is free to do or not ?
I don't know his financials intimately, he has a substantial property portfolio here run through offshore companies but it doesn't constitute his entire wealth , being a UK tax payer I'm no expert on how and where are the best places to keep your wealth as it doesn't concern me.
Bozi, some factors in a discussion are taken as a given otherwise an inordinate amount of time would be taken up with minutiae.
Your comment would be covered by this.
I prefer Ovaltine, it's a Tory thing.
Jezzoo he is an anomaly.
He is free to do what he wants.
However has he withdrawn his business interests from the UK and relocated them in Antigua.
Add, I'm hearing another bid is incoming 20p+
No bull buddy, I got the nod on Saturday telling me to hold tight till Christmas. Read into that what you will buddy.
I can only go by experience, I don't believing much of what I read, especially opinions.
I have a friend, a self made man worth in excess of 100m and he went to live in Antigua this year because he can see it coming too. He probably won't see the 15- from 20 year deadline so that's not a problem. He's there because tax residents don't pay inheritance tax, personal income tax, wealth tax, or capital gains tax and he has a youngish family. All taxes that will increase in the UK under Labour.
I know of others who officially live on Tortola for the same reasons
Jezzoo - plenty of the well to do already hide their money even in more prosperous times.
Save us all the "rich drive this country" horlix.
Copper, sadly I missed your recommendation, but well done for getting in there. A great result!
Novicehunter accuses someone of a basic world view only to then give us one from the other side of the idealogical coin.
Meanwhile, the SP plunges once more.
Thanks for the tip copperpot. Did look into UPL it when you last mentioned it but didn't invest at the time. Just read today's RNS, phenomenal offer rejected; so got in this morning.
Jezzoo you are repeating propaganda.
Look at the countries in the world attracting the most investment.
They are the ones with balanced economies.
Don't believe the lies.
The rich like to live in countries that are safe, have good schools and universities and have a structure of law that allows them to enjoy life.
Money is important to them, but as long as we don't go mad with taxation, they are willing to pay more.
Just look at the Scandinavian countries and Switzerland.
According to you wealth would be exiting these countries double quick.
But in reality the opposite is happening.
Late, late print of 1.5 mil shares appeared Friday.
So we have a too far left leaning government and it's killing the country, so your bright idea is to go even further Left and go into throwing cash at the poor mode ?
That would be a good time to get into Brewery and Tobacco shares I think.
If you tax the rich too much they have the option and the money to leave, it's been done before and those rich folk don't come back until it's financially viable.
The "poor" won't get rich and the rich that don't leave will hide their money instead of re investing it, did you read about the Bamfords ? And it hasn't even happened yet .
My source .......that NAL said didn't exist reckons this price is still way undervalued and has lots of upside.
I understand this is the Solg board but I want some of the good guy's to make a few quid.
Novicehunter these are not my views.
I am a part qualified actuary.
This is what has allowed the far East, countries like Singapore and South Korea to grow so rapidly.
You are talking about trickle down economics.
This has been proven time and time again not to work.
Again please read what I have said.
I am not on about taxing the rich as some ideological mantra.
I am on about rebalancing the economy, and unfortunately the tax burden has been skewed against the poorest in society.
You say the richest provide growth and prosperity.
But we have kept the richest taxes down and taxed the poorest.
And the opposite has happened, not only in the UK, but the rest of the western world.
So your premise is wrong in its completeness.
Get into UPL when I tipped them at 0.5p 5-6 months ago?
Quady we all have our personal views on taxation and unfortunately mine do not sit with your very basis perfect world view.not sure why this bb has suddenly become a economics forum as in reality does not really affect us, plus we all know that the taxing system needs to be as it is as the “richest” are the elements of our society and economy that drive growth and prosperity for the “poor “ as you so belittlingly write
Anyway let’s hope for a better week here
The total mismanagement of the UK economy is the reason I am going to vote Labour at the next general election.
I have never voted Labour in my life.
But this awful government that doesn't have a clue how to make work pay, and attacks those that are in jobs has to go and be defeated comprehensively.
So that they take time to reflect what the people of this country want.
Does Labour have the answers?
Probably not, but we cannot carry on like this.
Addicknt, please read my posts.
I am on about rebalancing the UK economy.
This is why we have a cost of living crisis.
It is almost impossible for someone on minimum wage to survive.
This is because the tax system is skewed to taxing the poorest in society more on a sliding scale.
Also fixed expenditure like council tax and energy bills affect the poorest to a greater degree.
This is because the SSA has been continuously cut again shifting the tax burden to the poorest in society.
I repeat I am talking about rebalancing.
This is why we have to increase taxes for the richest 25%.
Over the past decade taxes have been disparportionally landed on the poorest. Hence I am on about rebalancing, as this should never have happened in the first place.
As for QE we had no choice.
The QE aspect isn't that bad as the money isn't spent.
It's used to support the banks under it's capital requirements, so that existing lending doesn't have to be called in.
It's just to strengthen balance sheets and it will all be paid back with interest.
Why do I bother....
Q, I'm not 'confusing this with taxing the rich', your posts did. You also confuse spending power with propensity to spend - they are not synonymous.
Addicknt normally taxing any part of society reduces investment.
However in unbalanced economies that is not the case.
If the debt burden on an individual case was balanced, then interest rates is the answer.
When it's not then taxing the sections of society that have the spending power is
Germany being a case in example.
Also the Scandinavian countries. Also Switzerland.
This is how modern capitalism works.
Balancing economic output is not a socialist idea.
I think you are confusing this with taxing the rich.
It's not about that, it's about sharing the burden of taxation.
We know flat tax systems don't work.
Q, I was confused by the contradiction between both posts. You are right to say interest rates and taxation are the tools used to reduce inflation, but your point about the "rich" isn't. As you know, the wealthy have a much higher propensity to save and, as such, their impact on inflation is limited. An increase of say 5 or even 10% on higher earners has only one effect and that is to reduce investment . This has been proven time after time. Higher top rates are simply used by socialist governments as a sop to their followers and are driven by the politics of envy. They are not based upon economic theory or practice.
Controlling inflation has always been painful and it's inevitable that those with the least money suffer the most. There's no avoiding this, although politicians will never admit to this fundamental truth, despite the evidence smacking everyone in the face.
QE has been an unmitigated disaster and it makes my blood boil when I hear those responsible, Mark Carney in particular, deny their part in causing the current mess. The failures of this country are too numerous to mention, but all of them stem from the ineptitude of our politicians and central bankers. We have been very badly served by all of them.
Good morning addicknt.
Normally raising interest rates restricts money supply, but that only works in balanced economies.
What we have in the UK currently is an unbalanced economy.
So the money supply amongst the poorest is already restricted.
Hence you need to restrict the money supply of the richest 25% without hurting the 75% of the people already struggling.
This is why for the moment we need to raise taxes.
Now ideally spending should still be constrained and the extra money that is raised should be used to reduce the deficit.
As government is what is restricting investment.
This is because when government debt is too high, business knows at some point it's taxes will rise.
So we need to start fixing the deficit while not strangling growth and reducing inflation.
Hence restricting money supply for the people increasing their spending and not attacking the people reducing their spending and creating a recession and at the same time costing jobs and reducing tax revenues.
This isn't forever, but is required now.
1984
Not sure I would have agreed with your use of words but in essence you are spot on, although I disagree on the climate issue in terms of cost.
The return on investing in renewables keeps on getting better via batteries solar etc Musk hasn’t done too bad, mind you everything he touches seems to turn to gold……
Same goes for sharketmare’s post.
If the NHS is like the court system no wonder there are millions waiting for appointments.
All public services are 💩