Lloyds Banking Share Discussion Threads

[sr2day] 26/9/2020 16:40

this will be over 100p in three years time.

[k38] 26/9/2020 15:35

That would be the best outcome for small traders.

[diku] 26/9/2020 14:50

When it was 65p some said it was going to 80p...then came the swift U turn...nothing wrong in dreaming...aim high...

[diku] 26/9/2020 14:30

And what if it gets to 50p and then it starts going down again?...happy to see that?...

[k38] 26/9/2020 11:29

"PM Boris J is set to pledge hundreds of millions of pounds to the world health organisation to fight future viruses in a speech at the un general assembly""Support the system and ways will be a job for you"Being part of WHO is just another good pay job for the boys.

[diku] 26/9/2020 11:23

Even if it did get to 50p the amount of punters locked in on the way down from 50p to 25p will be rushing to exit...stitched up too many times...

[scruff1] 26/9/2020 11:13

In fact dont know about this Covid malarky but my curve has been well and truly flattened.

[scruff1] 26/9/2020 11:10

gaffer
I agree about about doubling your money. Id take it. I thought that the article was just about correct in other respects until I though if Lloy gets to 50p it would be a tad more than a dead cat bounce imo. At the moment all I seem to have is non bouncing dead ducks

[k38] 26/9/2020 10:49

This is good news, in 5 years will be no "union"... Brussels tax the poor give to well off and help themselves. Corruption for all to see, unless you are a blind remainer.xxxxx© Brexit Facts 2020Without Brexit, the UK economy would have been hammered under the latest plansYesterday the EU Parliament summarised its position on new and additional funding for the EU. It involves the introduction of six new EU-level taxes, as well as removing the rebates enjoyed by some countries. If the UK were still a full member of the EU this would have resulted in an increase of some 50% in the UK's annual contributions to the EU.These proposals were all originally made prior to the COVID crisis, but the plans are now being justified as being a solution to the massive need for funding as a result of the EU's new financial mechanisms to deal with these commitments.The EU Parliament's grab for more money for the EUJanuary 2021: a new tax on member countries based on non-recycled plasticJanuary 2021: a new tax on member countries based on the Emissions Trading System (a 'carbon tax')January 2023: a new digital services tax on internet-based businessesJanuary 2023: a new carbon tax on imports of goods from outside the EUJanuary 2024: a new financial transactions taxJanuary 2026: a new EU corporate tax on companiesTaxes go up and rebates get abolishedFinally, there is a complete removal of the rebates on contributions enjoyed by some countries. Last year the UK's rebate was £4.5bnThe EU seems to be very busy, continuing to make itself less and less attractive as a place to do business.

[xxxxxy] 26/9/2020 10:05

Edinburgh did well too. Well done.Cardiff didn't get alook in. Sad.Have a nice day.

[xxxxxy] 26/9/2020 10:04

New York has topped the Global Financial Centres Index (GFCI), while London retained the second spot, but the capital made some ground closing the gap between the two, gaining 24 points leaving only a four point difference.Meanwhile, Shanghai overtook Tokyo beating it to the third place, with a one point difference. Hong Kong and Singapore took 4th and 5th place respectively. Beijing, San Francisco, Shenzhen and Zurich rounded up the top 10 on the latest index. Los Angeles and Geneva dropped out the top 10, replaced by Shenzhen and Zurich.Within the top 30 financial hubs, Luxembourg, Boston, Seoul, and Madrid rose by more than five places.?The top 30 global financial centres ranked in the 28th Global Financial Centres Index. Graphic: Z/YenFinancial centres in Western Europe had a mixed performance on GFCI 28 after appearing strong on the 27th edition, dropping an average of 21 points (3.17%), with 15 hubs rising in ranking and 12 falling.In the Asia/Pacific region, 10 centres fell in ranking and 14 rose, indicating a "level of confidence in the stability of Asian centres and their approach to sustainable finance." Taipei, Chengdu, and Qingdao all jumped more than 30 places in the rankings.Hubs in North America, fell by an average of nine points, or 1.3%, reflecting the least change in ratings across all sectors, with Boston, Washington DC, and San Diego all improved five or more places in rankings. Out of the 11 hubs in the region, six have made it to the top 20, compared with four in GFCI 27.... Yahoo Finance

[xxxxxy] 26/9/2020 09:26

Want six new taxes? Vote for the EU. (Otherwise thank goodness for Brexit)EU Parliament plans for new EU taxes from 01 January, and for all rebates to be abolished?© Brexit Facts4EU.Org 2020Without Brexit, the UK economy would have been hammered under the latest plansYesterday the EU Parliament summarised its position on new and additional funding for the EU. It involves the introduction of six new EU-level taxes, as well as removing the rebates enjoyed by some countries. If the UK were still a full member of the EU this would have resulted in an increase of some 50% in the UK's annual contributions to the EU.These proposals were all originally made prior to the COVID crisis, but the plans are now being justified as being a solution to the massive need for funding as a result of the EU's new financial mechanisms to deal with these commitments.BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARYThe EU Parliament's grab for more money for the EUJanuary 2021: a new tax on member countries based on non-recycled plasticJanuary 2021: a new tax on member countries based on the Emissions Trading System (a 'carbon tax')January 2023: a new digital services tax on internet-based businessesJanuary 2023: a new carbon tax on imports of goods from outside the EUJanuary 2024: a new financial transactions taxJanuary 2026: a new EU corporate tax on companiesTaxes go up and rebates get abolishedFinally, there is a complete removal of the rebates on contributions enjoyed by some countries. Last year the UK's rebate was £4.5bn, so the UK's net contributions to the EU would rise by this sort of amount if the UK were still a member.?© Brexit Facts4EU.Org - click to enlarge"MEPs also insist on the abolition of all rebates."- EU Parliament report, 24 Sept 2020In 2019 according to HM Treasury and the House of Commons Library, the UK's net contribution to the EU was £9.44bn. In fact it was higher, as a result of the "off-budget" payments to the EU which never appear in their summaries. Nevertheless we have shown that the official figure would rise by 48% to £13.96bn without the UK's rebate.The costs of being a member of the EU would rise significantly under the EU Parliament's plansThe EU Parliament has couched the new taxes in ways which disguise the fact that member countries and their citizens will end up paying more. Under the above measures, the cost of doing business in the EU will rise. Ultimately this has a direct effect on all citizens.Here is an example of how these things are expressed in the EU Parliament's legislative resolution of 16 September 2020 on the draft Council decision on the system of own resources of the European Union (10025/2020 – C9-0215/2020 – 2018/0135(CNS)) :-"such costs should be covered entirely by income from genuine new own resources"To describe these new taxation revenue streams as "genuine new own resources" appears to come from the 'money grows on (carbon-neutral) trees' school of thinking.The EU is not only spending, it is now having to borrow for the first timeThe EU Parliament's legislative resolution also gives permission for the EU Commission to borrow on the world markets for the first time, thereby setting a dangerous precedent. Here is the opening statement:-"(1a) This Decision provides the legal basis for the Commission to borrow funds on the capital markets in order to finance expenditure in the framework of the Next Generation EU Recovery Package."OBSERVATIONSWhen most prudent households find themselves in difficult economic times they tighten their belts. Not so the EU.Four years ago when faced with a large shortfall in income as a result of losing the UK's annual contribution, did the EU scale back on its expenditures? No, it just kept on spending. The EU then simply came up with the idea of a "Divorce Bill" which was shockingly agreed to by Theresa May and her government.?© Brexit Facts4EU.Org - click to enlargeToday, faced with the double whammy of the loss of the "Bank of the UK" and the astronomical costs of the EU's COVID measures, the EU Parliament's solution is to tax more widely and deeply.The EU Parliament is not, of course, the ultimate decision-maker. These things involve the EU Council and the EU Commission too. All we can say is that the Commission always wants to extend its reach and the globalist leaders of most of the EU member states believe in the gradual creation of a superstate of 'Europe'.All non-EU countries – including the UK – will be hit by the EU Parliament's plansThanks to Brexit, the UK will not be facing a huge increase in its annual contribution for future years of membership of this sclerotic organisation. This would have happened - without Brexit - if the EU abolishes all rebates, as we have shown in our chart above.Instead the UK taxpayer will merely be paying out huge sums which have no basis in international law for the EU's contrived "Divorce Bill".That said, some of the new taxes described above will affect British companies who wish to trade with the EU, as well as those from other countries around the world. Taxes 3, 4, and 5 in our list above will almost certainly affect non-EU businesses.Remainers never said what type of EU we would be remaining inIt's important when reading a report such as the one above to state that the British public did actually vote for Brexit and we will be leaving. The Remain side have been fond of saying "Yes, but no-one ever voted for a particular type of Brexit." However - and as we pointed out many times during the debate - no-one on the Remain side ever admitted that no-one knew what voting Remain would mean. What type of EU would we remain in? Our report clearly shows one very expensive example of this.The Brexit bonusOne way or the other Great Britain will finally be leaving the Customs Union and Single Market on 31 December 2020. Very sadly we will be leaving Northern Ireland behind, as things currently stand. We don't yet know the precise terms of our departure, and we can only and sincerely hope that the Government will remain resolute and true to their words. If they don't they will not be forgiven by a great many millions of voters.To quote the Rt Hon the Baroness Thatcher from a different era, 32 years ago:"We have not successfully rolled back the frontiers of the state in Britain, only to see them reimposed at a European level, with a European super-state exercising a new dominance from Brussels."This threat remains, if the Government does not repudiate the Withdrawal Treaty before the end of this year.?The upside is that the EU seems to be very busy, continuing to make itself less and less attractive as a place to do business. This presents great opportunities for an independent, democratic, sovereign, and free trade-loving United Kingdom to reap the rewards.It is essential that the Government does not compromise in the coming weeks. This is why we continue to fight.

[xxxxxy] 26/9/2020 08:05

At some point the penny is going to drop. And just have to face it. The NHS has been given time and resources. The vulnerable know the truth and should stay stay safe. The rest get on with living.

[xxxxxy] 26/9/2020 08:02

Tackling the virusBy JOHNREDWOOD | Published: SEPTEMBER 26, 2020Many want there to be an easy answer to quelling the virus. The medics and scientists search for a vaccine but have to warn it could take a long time or even prove a fruitless quest. Some seek better treatments to lessen the death rate from severe cases of the disease. These are the only two solutions to defeating the pandemic.Others hold to the view that there is some special way that will eliminate the virus as it circulates in any particular country. Many countries are suffering intense debates about whether their governments have done well or badly in controlling the virus whilst limiting the damage virus control methods do to economies and jobs. The bitter truth is looking around the world most governments have adopted central World Health Organisation tenets that increasing amounts of social and economic activity have to be closed down to squeeze down the prevalence of the virus. Only then can gradual relaxations test out how far they can go in restoring a bit more normal life before virus disaster strikes again. Practically all governments that have adopted versions of this approach have ended up with a second wave and the need to renew the abrasive medicine of full or partial lock down.In the early days of the crisis the cry went out that a massive expansion of ventilators would see us through. This was tried, only to discover the death rate remained high.A more sustained case has been made out that Test, track and trace will do the job. The theory is if you test enough people, especially those who might be carrying it or have symptoms, and then isolate enough of such people and their contacts quickly enough, you will cut the circulation of the virus. We now see quite a few countries with large test and trace systems have second waves to deal with.There are five central weaknesses to test and trace. The first is the delay in getting a test whilst people are asymptomatic or unaware that they have the disease. The second is the number of false results from tests which disrupts the data. The third is the refusal of some people to self isolate for a fortnight to make sure the virus has passed them, as people have demands on their lives which makes fourteen days locked in at home difficult. The fourth is the unwillingness of many to self isolate just because they are told they have been in contact with someone with the disease. The fifth is the impossibility of knowing many of the people encountered by a busy person who has travelled or been to populous places.The organisation of accountable government at national level for good reasons also means that if any country does have success in curtailing the virus it then needs to shut itself off from foreign visitors whilst the virus rages. This can also be difficult given the strong patterns of global business ,travel and trade. Given the lack of success so far by the World Health Organisation in producing ways to remove or tackle the virus there is no evidence world government would have cracked it to justify the lack of democratic accountability that would bring. The WHO of course does not have to balance curbing the virus with economic consequences in the way governments need to do.

[spartan attack] 26/9/2020 00:31

2 important facts in life

1. realising when somebody is on the ball before you

2, acting on it