Lloyds Banking Share Discussion Threads

[poikka] 20/6/2020 20:54

This site is full of crazies.

[maxk] 20/6/2020 20:09

It's all here...supposedly, if you care to dig through it.

Talk about hide in plain sight.





The overiding question I have is why did the gov choose to trash the economy based on pop statistics?

[stonedyou] 20/6/2020 20:05

British banks may have to copy Sweden by protecting cash for elderly to ensure they’re not cut out of payments altogether as experts warn hard currency is on brink of collapse



•British banks may soon follow Sweden in order to take cash safety precautions

•New laws could be designed for British banks to replicate the model

•Concerns now to ensure elderly and vulnerable are not cut out of payments


Britain could soon be set to follow the lead of Sweden in taking precautionary steps to protect access to cash for the elderly.

New laws could be designed for British banks to replicate the Swedish model to make sure the elderly and vulnerable are not cut out of payments, as report the Times.

A demise of the UK cash system has been frequently warned by campaigners, with its acceleration due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic brought to the Government's attention.

Chancellor Rishi Sunak made a promise in his budget on March 11 to pass laws so that everyone who needed cash could get it.

[jl5006] 20/6/2020 18:59

Sorry poik
That is the point - associated deaths is unproven. Just tell me how all the 42k deaths were tested??????????????
The nhs website discloses those who have died from without diagnosed underlying conditions - may well have but not known previously.
No year is a normal year - there are always variances -

[poikka] 20/6/2020 18:22

As for your figures, this from HM Gov. coronavirus site.

"Total number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths
42,589
Deaths of people who have had a positive test result."

[poikka] 20/6/2020 18:20

jl - "So hard
What an earth is a normal year?"

Firstly, I wrote 'normal', not normal - spot the difference. Normal means when there's no unusual cause(s), like a war, or 'flu epidemic, or yellow fever. Why am I having to explain the bleeding obvious!

This might help to explain it for you:

"Since the total number of deaths registered in a week normally follows a predictable pattern, scientists use the extra deaths seen during the pandemic to estimate mortalities caused by the pandemic.

This captures the misdiagnosed deaths, but it also includes the deaths caused by the strain the virus puts on a society.

"These deaths likely would not have happened if the pandemic had not happened and they should be counted in the death toll," says Stéphane Helleringer, a demographer at Johns Hopkins University."

[jl5006] 20/6/2020 17:41

Poika
So hard
What an earth is a normal year?
Last year - the year before - the average of two years - 5 yrs.
The number of deaths FROM C 19 is recorded on a specific website - [e-mail]
At the last count it was 290 under 60s - none of whom had reported underlying conditions = and c 1300 overall.
It seems nurses write with C 19 in care homes etc - signed off willy nilly

[poikka] 20/6/2020 17:31

Btw., that's similar to how net immigration's calculated - number of people entering minus those leaving each year - simple.

[poikka] 20/6/2020 17:30

5xy re number of deaths from Covid.

Mate, it's very simple, all that's done is to count the number of deaths this year and compare it to the number of deaths in a 'normal' year.

What puzzles me is why the number of deaths in Germany is so much less in excess of a normal year compared to, say, the UK.

Now I know that they're a more disciplined bunch than the average Brit, and do as they're told, but I would like a good explanation, and not one from a biased source.

[maxidi] 20/6/2020 17:27

God save us from sociologists and epidemiologists. The world would be a better place without them.
They will be the ruin of us all.

[maxidi] 20/6/2020 17:22

sciencedirect = a load of lefty sociologists I believe. Marxism is alive and well amongst the so called scientific brainwashed lecturers and their like.
Don't believe a word they spew.

[maxidi] 20/6/2020 17:11

keith95...

Would you have preferred Corbyn to be in charge along with Lib/Green etc.?
I cannot believe you would.

Brexit party? UKIP?

[keith95] 20/6/2020 15:27

grahamite2

"It's amazing the number of things people did not vote on in 2016."

To include Theresa May's rejected Brexit, taken on board by Johnson in 2019.

I agree - ROFL :)


hxxps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0176268018301320


"We find that voting Leave is associated with older age, white ethnicity, low educational attainment, infrequent use of smartphones and the internet, receiving benefits, adverse health and low life satisfaction. "

Life's sad losers ..... save for putting an X in a box to give the ERG a financial windfall at their own expense.

:)

[cobourg1] 20/6/2020 14:54

mikemichael2 - consider doing this


Find out if your system is 32 bit or 64 bit, download and write a DVD for a free recent Linux Distro ( I like Mint 19.3 but any of them are better than Windows and all the apps are free). Install it as a dual boot with Windows, it will give you the choice to do so on installation, then you have an alternative. If Windows falls over or runs slower and slower as it strangles itself creating thousands of useless junk files you have a better system as a backup. Linux is more secure, faster and virtually bullet proof. I have been using Linux for 20 years now. It used to be a geeks system, but the latest incarnations are just like Windows, you point and click on icons on the desk top.

Chromebooks are also cheap, ultra reliable and boot instantly for day to day use, but they do need a wireless internet connection, but then of course they are Linux based.

Like me, you may find that you rarely boot into Windows.

[alphorn] 20/6/2020 14:51

G2 - keep that one ready for bbj's new site.

ROFLMAO.

............and that is from someone who is now bullish GBP!

[grahamite2] 20/6/2020 14:15

I don't remember people voting in 2016 to celebrate clinging onto a few international manufacturers that decided to stay in the UK aided by government bribes.
I don't remember people voting in 2016 to paint their living rooms green. It's amazing the number of things people did not vote on in 2016.

[keith95] 20/6/2020 14:07

maxk:

"This follows Nissan’s decision to concentrate production in Sunderland…"




"Nissan: UK factory still under threat from no-deal Brexit"

With a £60 Million bung from Theresa May if I remember rightly.

I don't remember people voting in 2016 to celebrate clinging onto a few international manufacturers that decided to stay in the UK aided by government bribes.


I sold Lloy in 2014 after its recovery from the worst of the PPI debacle and the financial crisis ...

32p is still 10% less than the right issues during the US led financial crisis ... that I did take part in ....

... I'll get back into Lloy but not until I have a handle on how truly disastrous Brexit will be for the UK economy, with idiot Johnson and his idiotic puppet master Cummings pulling the strings.

[alphorn] 20/6/2020 13:51

x5 - that is called negotiation. You had better get used to it before trying to deal with the more aggressive countries.
Crying to this thread is really not going to help you one jot although you might get 25 upticks. Lol

[xxxxxy] 20/6/2020 13:48

Peter Brunger20 Jun 2020 1:24PMIt looks like these numbers may have been derived from a recent ONS report on deaths involving Covid-19 (link below).  This included the important proviso that "In this ONS report, the term "involving COVID-19" referred to any and all deaths that had COVID-19 mentioned anywhere on the death certificate, whether as underlying cause or not.  That is, these numbers includes deaths where the patient may have died with Covid-19, but not from it. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19uk/deathsoccurringbetween1marchand30april20201LikeReplyP J Honey20 Jun 2020 1:26PM@Peter Brunger GPs were instructed to put Covid on the death certificate if there was any suspicion at all that it could have been a factor. Why? True deaths lower not higher than government reported daily.Why?6LikeReplyPeter Brunger20 Jun 2020 1:30PM@P J Honey @Peter Brunger Yes, agreed, and especially with regards to care home deaths where I understand that death certificates were completed by nurses guided by GPs over the phone.  Whatever the motives for that, it means the risks are actually even lower than the numbers in the ONS report suggest.3LikeReplybill hughes20 Jun 2020 1:31PM@P J Honey @Peter Brunger To make the death toll big, thats why. If there weren't loads of people dying, there wasn't a crisis, so there was no need for lockdown and the economic catastrophe coming in its wake. Basically the government got bounced into the lockdown policy by the media and then invested so much in it that even when a chance came to withdraw - when the NIghtingale hospitals were unused so the NHS obviously was not being swamped - it didn't take that chance and if fact doubled-down and started arguing that all the care home deaths were tragic and we had to carry on lockdown to save their lives which was obviously BS. 

[minerve 2] 20/6/2020 12:38

"Fear not, Minnie, I believe she's now ditched it."

What Jayzee or the song?

LOL

[optomistic] 20/6/2020 12:19

uninstall it, but make sure you have another browser installed first,

Opera is very good.

[mikemichael2] 20/6/2020 12:13

Nearly all Windows 10 now Alp.

[utrickytrees] 20/6/2020 12:11

Delivering their crack BB?