Lloyds Banking Share Discussion Threads

[covid 19 deal] 12/9/2020 12:59

Those whi dreamed of more dole money...now enjoy

[covid 19 deal] 12/9/2020 12:57

While itv went diwn to 57..some people touted 20p...lol..there are some...you only loose money by IG market margin call..other rwise...once in a life time opportunity to buy uk shares and wait for 1 year..double the money and retire...we buying at 26p level..not 73p

[xxxxxy] 12/9/2020 12:25

I voted for the Clause 38 override when I voted for the Withdrawal ActBy JOHNREDWOOD | Published: SEPTEMBER 12, 2020I reproduce below part of my speech on the Withdrawal Act as it is very relevant today. I and like minded colleagues only voted for the Withdrawal Act because it provided a clear UK legal override if the EU did not keep to their promises of respecting UK sovereignty and working to a Free Trade Agreement.My contribution to the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill debate, 8 January 2020By JOHNREDWOOD | Published: JANUARY 9, 2020John Redwood (Wokingham (Con): Clause 38 is welcome. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Stone (Sir William Cash) for being one of the co-authors of that excellent piece of Government-proposed legislation. I also support the Minister in opposing various new clauses and amendments before us.It seems to come down to the question, "What is sovereignty?" and I think the public understand it so much better than many Opposition MPs seem to. The public fully understand that our constitution should be based on the proposition that the public decide who should represent them in the House of Commons and then the House of Commons decides what laws are appropriate, what taxes to raise and how to spend that money, and at the end of four or five years-or sometimes a shorter period-the public get to judge whether we collectively made a good job of it or not, or whether there is some new configuration of Members of Parliament that can make it better. So the public are ultimately sovereign but they trust us, their elected Members, with their sovereignty for a period of up to five years to exercise the powers of government.When we first joined the European Economic Community, the country was assured that that sovereignty -that set of powers-would not be damaged in any way. To underwrite that promise the Government said, correctly then, that there would be no matter decided in the European Economic Community that could be forced on the United Kingdom against its will; we always had a veto so that if it proposed a law, a charge or a tax that we did not like, we could use the veto. Over our years of membership, we have seen those vetoes gradually reduced-those powers taken away-so that today, although we are still a full member of what is now the European Union, there are huge swathes of policy areas where we are not free to legislate where we wish, or in some cases not free to legislate at all, because it is entirely occupied territory under the Community acquis.The ultimate sovereign power in the United Kingdom today is the European Court of Justice; that is the ultimate appeal of any legal issue, and it can overrule what the two Houses of Parliament decide, it can overrule a statute, and it can strike down a law passed in this place. It is that which a majority of the British people decided they thought was unsatisfactory.When they had voted many years ago to support our continued membership of the European Economic Community it was called a Common Market and misrepresented as a free trade area, which of course is rather different from a customs union with complex rules, and they were given an assurance that their Parliament would still be able to choose their taxes, spend their money and pass their laws in the traditional way. That turned out not to be true.The loss of those freedoms was progressive under the Single European Act, under the Maastricht treaty, under the Amsterdam treaty, the Nice treaty and, above all, the Lisbon treaty. The Lisbon treaty was the culmination of that journey towards a very strong European Government that was superior to the United Kingdom Government, and the implied substantial strengthening of the wide-ranging powers of the European Court of Justice, because every directive and every regulation that was passed-and there were thousands of them-not only produced a more directly acting legal power over ?our country that we could not modify or change, but also gave so much more extensive powers to the European Court of Justice because it is the ultimate arbitrator of that body of law.It is that body of law which this legislation today is seeking to put under United Kingdom control. We have been arguing over this for three and a half years now. The public thought it was a very simple matter and told us to get on with it. We had a fractious and unhelpful Parliament until recently, which did all in its power to thwart the putting into law of the wishes of the United Kingdom electors.I hope today, after a second general election and after a referendum where the British people made it clear that they wished their sovereignty to rest again with them and be delegated to their Parliament, that the Opposition might have understood that, and might have understood that currently, contrary to what we have been told by the Labour Front Bench, there are a very large number of areas where we cannot do as we please.Let us start with the money. Yes, we wish to take back control of the money. This Parliament cannot decide to reduce the amount of money it pays to the European Union. They decide that: they determine the bill and they enforce the bill. I hope that Ministers can reassure me that after December, at the end of the implementation period, that will cease and we will only pay when there is an agreement between us and the European Union that we accept for services or joint policies that we wish to undertake as a sovereign nation. We cannot go on accepting their hand in our pocket, taking our money under their legal powers.I personally think it is a great pity that we have had such a delay to exit, because I resent the net £1 billion or more a month we are paying in. That will continue, I am afraid, throughout this year. I would like that money for priorities in Wokingham and in the constituencies of other colleagues here in the House of Commons. I find it very odd that so many MPs are so dismissive of the significance of the money, given the quite important role it seemed to play in the referendum campaign and given how colleagues are normally very keen to see increases in expenditure on public services in our country. They do not make the connection that if we carry on paying very large sums to the European Union, it limits our scope to make the increases they would like.It also means we do not control our own taxes, so our country cannot choose the power to tax any of our sales; that is determined for us. It has to be the VAT tax system. We had to introduce that when we joined the European Union. There are arguments for continuing with some kind of VAT system, but surely we want to decide what rate it is levied at and what items it is levied on. There are quite a number of items that I think it should not be levied on, where I think I would find agreement across the Committee. However, we are not allowed today to remove VAT from green products, for example, because that is against European Union rules. I therefore look forward to our opportunity to shape our own taxation system as soon as we are properly out.There is then the issue of when we actually have control over our law. What I hope clause 38 will achieve is that if the European Union decides during the implementation period to pass laws that are particularly ?penal on the United Kingdom or are damaging to our commercial and economic interests, we can use that reassertion of parliamentary sovereignty before the expiry of the implementation period to ensure that that particular law does not apply to the United Kingdom. Otherwise, there is an invitation to anyone of bad will in the European Union to think of schemes that would be disadvantageous to the United Kingdom during the implementation period.On borders, where again those on the Labour Front Bench seem surprisingly dismissive of a very important question that has been in our debate throughout the referendum and in subsequent general elections, I think there is a general view in the country, which goes well beyond Conservative voters, that there should be a fair system of entry between EU and non-EU people. At the moment, the EU gets preference. I think a lot of people feel that there should be some overall limitation on the numbers of people coming in seeking low-paid work or speculatively seeking work. They favour some kind of a work permit system, which is quite common in many other advanced civilised countries. Because we wish people who join us to be welcomed, because we want them to live to a decent standard and because we accept the commitment to pay them benefits and find them subsidised housing if that is their requirement, surely it should be in our power to decide how many people we welcome in this way, and to decide that that should be related to our capacity to offer them something worth while, and to our economic needs. I give way to my right hon. Friend, who has done so much in this area.Sir Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford and Woodford Green) (Con): May I just pick up on one point? My right hon. Friend talks about, "should we wish to give them benefits". The reality now is that the British Government have to pay benefits even to families of people working over here when their families are not with them. That is roundly disliked across Europe, but those countries all accept there is nothing they can do about it because the European Court of Justice imposed that as part of freedom of movement. It was never debated as part of freedom of movement and it was never supposed that it would happen. It is an end to sovereignty when one can no longer make a decision to change something like that.John Redwood: My right hon. Friend puts it brilliantly; that is exactly the kind of limitation of our sovereign power, and of our freedom to make decisions that please our electors, that I have been talking about. It is quite important, given the history of this debate.The speech then went on to make the case for England having a say in these matters.....

[gaffer73] 12/9/2020 12:21

Exactly, the mistake was not selling.

[bargainbob] 12/9/2020 12:10

No Oil in Shetland . We covered it before .The waters off Shetland only cover 12 miles.

Same as For Isle of man and Jersey.

[minerve 2] 12/9/2020 11:50

You are funny K38. How old are you?

[k38] 12/9/2020 11:45

The UK economy still on the growth track. All countries have over spend because of covid-19. Many countries, especially European under the "Brussels union flag " will suffer because of the single currency and their bureaucracy... Not UK. We can chance things because we will take our own decisions at the right time.

[k38] 12/9/2020 11:34

You said, owr own mistakes.. before the last big crash and the "buy" Halifax , Lloyds was not a mistake investment. Was a very good income share, not any more. Maybe one day but for now it becomes an opportunity buy to sell (risk) share. CEO follow government orders, I am afraid to say and only interested on their own benefits. "I can't remember any complaints when the share price was 60p and the divi was 6%, we were all milking the profits. Its easy to blame the CEO for our own investment mistakes. As mentioned earlier, we should have all sold at 50p."

[gaffer73] 12/9/2020 10:42

My point was if not for Brexit and more damaging Covid the share price would be 75p by now. Don't forget LLOY have had a bad time for the last 12 years, financial crisis, ppi, Brexit, Covid, low interest rates, divi cancellation, where really do you expect the share price to be.For my sins I am a long term holder of LLOY and will continue to hold until I retire or possibly even through my retirement.

[poikka] 12/9/2020 10:32

The burdensome structure of the EU means that it's extremely difficult, if not impossible, for them to come to an accommodation with another country, such as the UK.

I expect that the talks will fail as they can only follow their own agenda, the Brussels created WA being the prime example. That was not an Agreement, as such.

[poikka] 12/9/2020 10:27

"Totalitarianism is in the DNA of the EU."

Increasingly, the EU is treating the UK in much the same way that the CCP (China) is treating the ROC (Taiwan), replacing military threats with economic threats.

[cheshire pete] 12/9/2020 09:39

True colours of the EU showing now. If you don't succumb to their threats, bullying and blackmail they'll try to destroy you. In our case by splitting the Union, and aided by the likes of Sturgeon, Blair, Major and our leftist media. Wake up remainers this is the club that you think is so great and want to remain a part of.

[xxxxxy] 12/9/2020 09:28

So gosh. It will be a No Deal. Great.WTO

[xxxxxy] 12/9/2020 09:27

Rory The Cat@RoryTheCat11hReplying to @johnredwoodIndeed and as the EU has withdrawn the Canada Plus offer made by Tusk, the UK should repudiate the WA, PD & NIP. We must not capitulate.

[xxxxxy] 12/9/2020 09:26

John Redwood@johnredwood1hThe EU is still trying to treat the UK as a colony. We left so EU law and their court no longer rules us. Parliament now decides on UK law and trade policy.

[xxxxxy] 12/9/2020 09:24

We still need a stronger recoveryBy JOHNREDWOOD | Published: SEPTEMBER 12, 2020GDP figures for July showed growth of 6.6%, continuing the recovery that started in May as the lock down began to ease. It still leaves the UK economy 11.7% down from the February peak.Within the totals manufacturing is now down 8.7% on February. Areas like computers have regained all the losses, and pharmaceuticals are ahead. Trailing at the bottom of the pack comes transport equipment including cars, still down 26.7% on February. I have set out the special factors that are depressing this output in previous blogs.Even more worrying is the continued poor performance of education and health. In July education output was still 21.9% below February. This will now correct given the successful return of most schools this month. Health output was still down 25.7%. More work needs to be done to get a full range of treatments, operations and surgery appointments to start tackling the big backlog. This should be an overriding priority of government.Naturally arts, entertainments and catering remain very depressed as social distancing is continuing to take its toll.

[xxxxxy] 12/9/2020 09:22

Rod Evans11 Sep 2020 10:37AMThere is a very strange counter intuitive event going on with the Eurozone.In all normal economic systems, when the currency you are using, becomes the cause of your economic collapse, you revalue your currency and rebuild from the newly established currency base.Here we have a situation where an increasing number of countries are suffering economically, because the currency value is wrong for their circumstances. Yet they remain wedded to the very thing that is taking their nation into penury?The likes of Italy, Spain, Greece, Cyprus, Portugal and increasingly close to joining them France, will have to decide. Do they continue to pay the price for the "Project", or do they accept, national priority towards their own people is what ultimately matters?The majority always have the ultimate say and will enforce their view on their politicians via the ballot box.The only exception to this fundamental democratic right is the abandonment of democracy and the adoption of totalitarianism.We watch with increasing concern, which option the Eurozone nations will choose to take.28LikeReplyMark Tennent11 Sep 2020 10:53AM@Rod Evans  "The only exception to this fundamental democratic right is the abandonment of democracy and the adoption of totalitarianism.""Europe's nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation." - Jean Monnet.  Totalitarianism is in the DNA of the EU.

[xxxxxy] 12/9/2020 09:22

Lagarde and the Euro.... Big Cheddar11 Sep 2020 12:44PM"They fear a truncated recovery once the low-hanging fruit is picked and the initial 'V'-shaped rebound from Covid-19 fades, leaving a shrunken [€EU ] economy with mass unemployment and thousands of crippled companies."Hilariously, these are the people threatening us with a trade war! So their threats to block access for the City of London are real are they?I do hope BJ stands firm. The EU will be desperate for a trade deal, but I almost hope their arrogance and hubris takes them over the cliff face.... Daily Telegraph

[xxxxxy] 12/9/2020 09:21

John Redwood@johnredwood1hThe EU is now saying they will continue the trade talks with the UK because they think the PM is bluffing over the new legislation. Not a good start to say he is not telling the truth about the UK's plans

[utyinv] 12/9/2020 09:07

Gaffer73,

Many investors don’t trade shares like day traders, they invest and expect the income to come in.

Not everyone invests like we may invest, watching the markets daily, some people have busy lives. If you were buying speculative high risk shares maybe you will be watching attentively, but many invest in what are regarded as Blue Chip secure stock that are income generating and thus constantly growing.

What about the millions who invest in pensions/funds who cannot sell a particular stock?

For the majority of investors mentioned above, they expect fluctuations but not a reduction in capital value of 60%, not from supposedly blue chip secure stock anyway.

Antonio’s stewardship has been woeful. A cash generating machine that is a bedrock of capital investments for many, has performed badly and a lot of which is as a result of poor management and a lack of concern for the owners of the Company, the shareholders, many of whom are not speculative day traders but stoic capital investors whose main purpose is to earn an income.