Member Info for 67Sam

"Lloyds profits and should go back to shareholders"
A sustainable level of profit returned to shareholders is what i'd like and in the long run what I think supports the SP best. My first impression was it felt prudent of them to accrue for likely debts and to do so generously, given the current outlook. In the event they overestimate the actual level then the surplus will be returned, if not then it has less of a shock impact in the next quarter. And I noticed others also speculate a little on whether such generous provision may also be wise in the face of some continuing debate about a bank windfall tax and I tend to agree with them.

Epro
I called you arrogant because you stated " ...are of no interest to anyone".
Who are you to talk for anyone else on this board?
It was an accurate observation, not an insult. Arrogant means "an exaggerated sense of one's own importance".
I chose the word carefully as you appear to have become a self appointed spokesman for this board by claiming you know certain posts are of no interest to anyone.
Well, I quite like Hardup and LTI's posts.
So I was not insulting you, I was correcting you. I also gave you feedback on how it feels to have someone else claim they speak for everyone.
Do you understand now?

"dimwitted comments like yours and hardups of no interest to anyone"
who do you think you are speaking for Mr. Arrogant?

"if Lloyds picks up cheap houses like this"
New builds only, usually in quantity on same site. Early days yet.

https://www.ii.co.uk/analysis-commentary/chart-week-lloyds-bank-hits-my-first-target-and-then-falls-back-ii525737

Falkland
OK then, if he wasn't already rich and famous and you had to describe him to the police, what would you say?

falker
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9cCcGIstCw
its quite a beautiful scene actually; but Ive not been anointed myself.

falk
meaning what?

"he was anointed"
lol , yeah, as he went down to the river to pray
I don't resent him personally. I just dislike dysfunctional government.

"they will be ruling our country" is a bit divisive and unhelpful?
Mind you I did get called a ****** for saying he was a small brown man.
I was proved wrong when I said they wouldn't elect him - think they would have lasted longer under Mordaunt though. She has less hubris to target and would look less tiny against Starmer at PMQ's.

"The Tories didn't even want Sunak otherwise he would have already have the job prior to Truss."
I agree. Seems a delusion to expect him to last very long, various very good reasons have already been given. Having a conflict of business interests by marriage and not the faintest idea of how ordinary income families live have already set the clock ticking.
Lots of pussy footing around followed by losing a general election - thats what I'm anticipating him doing.

cuckoo
Popular post, but reading "truss didn't do anything" is a bit galling.

"I think Hardup takes it "
Though he does get a bit fruity
"being sarcastic you fecking plum"

"Can you use these Recommendations as *food vouchers* or *drink vouchers*?"
Yes, they are very good for feeding ego's.

I think Hardup takes it for commitment, consistency and service to others in his daily updates.

Gate
TFE's post was well written, calm and reflective and non adversarial. Although Brexit wasn't my vote, I also believe its best to accept it and think about where we are now and not harp on about it. Clearly it struck a chord with the majority that read it, to have attracted 30+ recommends.
Although it didn't receive even a third as many as that endorsements, my favourite post of the week has to be UncleDoug's list of Brexit benefits. It was absolutely priceless. I am beginning to be persuaded of the Brexit dividends myself now; its the gift that keeps on giving. Four Tory Prime Minsters despatched and certainty that they will lose the next time they face the public.

"Should be more but the BoE are gutless pussies"
I wouldn't be surprised to see as little as 0.5% increase in Nov. I would have thought 0.75% max. Only three of the MPC wanted 0.75% in Sept and one wanted 0.25%. Most recent comment was to suggest rates are overestimated by the market and could remain under 5%.

Grayling
"you already have 35 full years on your NI record the pension projection may still say that you can increase your state pension......by making a category 3 voluntary NI contribution"
These can help fill in any gaps in qualifying credits to help you reach 35 years and I took it from RogerA this is what he has done. This is in the context of being told he was entitled to the maximum, currently £185.15 for men of a certain age. On nearing retirement he was told he was required to pay in around three years vol contributions to qualify for this amount, despite previously being assured he had met the threshold. They always make it painfully clear during your working life that its a state pension forecast, not a statement of fact.
I am not aware that you can make any further class 3 contributions that will increase a New State Pension beyond the above amount.
https://www.gov.uk/pay-voluntary-class-3-national-insurance

RogerA
Don't underestimate the amount of mistakes that are made by DWP. They seem to respond quite well to challenges. A detailed account of all your NI contributions throughout your working life should be available on line. This will help you clarify if any were regarded as missing or incomplete.

RogerA
Its worth checking out whether you have been stitched up - my understanding is once you accrue 35 years full credits you have already met the maximum threshold of income you can receive.
Complicating factors will include any opting out of S2P you may have made when you were in a final salary scheme as this will mean deductions. But the decision should be based on whether your entire history of full NI contributions equals 35 or more - not just the ones you made during the last 35 years before reaching an age when you can claim.