Funds Insider - Opening the door to funds

Welcome to the Citywire Funds Insider Forums, where members share investment ideas and discuss everything to do with their money.

You'll need to log in or set up an account to start new discussions or reply to existing ones. See you inside!

Notification

Icon
Error

Economic Growth-Are lunatics running the economy?
Jeremy Bosk
Posted: 24 May 2012 01:12:01(UTC)
#31

Joined: 09/06/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,316

A very small percentage of a very large number and value of transactions adds up to a very large amount. The tax is mainly designed to make computerised algorithmic trading too expensive and slow down markets. It would make a flash crash less likely. A single big trader such as JP Morgan will have millions of transactions worth trillions every year. 0.005 per cent of 1,000,000,000,000 (a trillion) is 20,000,000 which is enough for the big traders to move offshore. Small investors might find the effort too much. So it would be a tax on small investors.

Someone who bought and sold £100,000 in a year would pay £500. Very few people these days buy a share and hold it for ever because that way you get stuck with a lot of losers like Woolworth. Only masochists held Northern Rock all the way down. There are plenty of other reasons to not buy and hold. Most of us trade rather than invest and our average holding period is a little over a year. I have fourteen shares. The longest holding period is just over four years, a couple over two years and the rest have been bought in the last eighteen months.

So this tax would simply make it even harder to save for your old age and look after your money sensibly.

If pointing out the likely consequences of an ill thought out tax makes me a Tory then so is anyone with an IQ larger than their shoe size. I believe in a functioning welfare state funded by progressive taxation. I do not believe in making a religion of greed and selfishness. Pragmatically, capitalist economies grow faster but need to be controlled by people with hearts and consciences.
Jeremy Bosk
Posted: 24 May 2012 01:22:57(UTC)
#32

Joined: 09/06/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1,316

The Prof's story disappeared from view while I was writing my last response. I mis-remembered his quoted tax rate as 0.005 when it was actually 0.05. And I should not do sums late at night. Somebody else have a go.
Clive B
Posted: 24 May 2012 10:02:08(UTC)
#33

Joined: 25/11/2010(UTC)
Posts: 508

Thanks: 225 times
Was thanked: 174 time(s) in 101 post(s)
Re FTT. Isn't it odd how many well intentioned views end with "we need another tax".

No, we don't, we need to pay LESS tax. That's about the only thing that's going to increase demand.

Actually, I can't see why people expect to be able to act like muppets for a decade or more, borrowing amounts they couldn't possibly repay, then correct the situation without pain.
2 users thanked Clive B for this post.
dd on 28/05/2012(UTC), Gill Pelosi on 31/05/2012(UTC)
Prof Eman
Posted: 24 May 2012 20:36:59(UTC)
#34

Joined: 08/04/2010(UTC)
Posts: 480

John Taylor at #28
I wholeheartedly agree with you about giving help to small businesses. I refer here to the manufacturing side of things, as opposed to financial. In line with the perceived need to move the economy away from financials, and over reliance on them, to more industry/manufacturing.
I fully support your point d-Encouragement of long term investment.
In the current climate I believe that tax incentives alone are unlikely to be adequate, and cash injections for investment to help during the credit squeeze should be considered.
Something on the lines of a Qualifying investment of £5,000 to £10,000 attracts a cash grant of £1,000; £10,000 to £20,000 cash grant of £2,000;£20,000 to £30,000 grant of £3,000 and an investment above £30,000 would attract a grant of £4,000.
Any comments John or anyone?
Prof Eman
Posted: 25 May 2012 10:47:03(UTC)
#35

Joined: 08/04/2010(UTC)
Posts: 480

Had a look at Citywires Friday papers.
There are two interesting articles on matters relating, both from The Daily Telegraph.
-Britain can't afford to fall for the charms of the false economic Messiah Paul Krugman. and
-Once again Europe's leaders have swooped into Brussels and vanished hours
later without offering any clear way out of the pulsating crisis at hand.
In light of the above give me Krugman's approach any time.
At least he offers a solution, and if enough people believe him, confidence will be restored, and we will come out of the recession.
Rose G
Posted: 25 May 2012 11:54:20(UTC)
#36

Joined: 26/11/2009(UTC)
Posts: 112

The Uk is in an an uneviable position - we are not part of the Eurozone, but we are having to contribute to the EU, who have no transparency in how they spend the money from member contributions.

We are also, I believe, heavily connected with the European banks, including Greece - so whether Greece leaves the EU or not the UK investors (banks & individuals) will lose out. What is very clear to me is that none of the EU members have ever given us a helping hand - our politicians are either laughed at or worse, not given any respect from the other European member countries - they are happy to take our contributions, but when it comes to accepting our arguments, we have bent over backwards in trying to come to terms with their decisions.

I am not a fan of Cameron, but I believe he is right to stand up & not give in to Brussels about voting for convicted criminals - custodial sentences mean that you lose your franchise & no voting - why should we be told how to use our common laws?

The EU was created with increasing the power held by the individuals within this area & IMO, they are corrupt as most African politicians - the organisation is now so big, they believe they cannot fail, same as the banks.

We know now that several of the countries who joined the EU cooked their books - this has been accepted as the done thing - how on earth can they then ask the UK to continue to contribute to the EU when it is a failing organisation.

The common fishery policies, is among one of the worst thought out, including the CAP, we have some of the daftest legislation coming from Brussels. I did not vote in the last mayoral or local elections, but come the general election, UKIP will get my vote, because they are the only ones who say they want us out of the EU, but still trading with Europe.

Greece is bankrupt because the politicians wanted to save the banks - let the banks go, default on payment, start with a clean slate, but it is not just their debts that are the problem, they like living in cloud cuckoo land, their attitude to debt is even more of a problem.

Here in the UK all Cameron & his clan can come up with is the large debt they were left by nulabour - if they had been in power, they too would have bailed out the banks, who bank roll them anyway!

Its not only that they are lunatics running the show, it is the lunatics that can convince every one they can do the job - anyone remember Hitler, he was able to convince his followers that he had the solution to end their problem, & millions followed him without asking any questions. Megalomania is a given character trait in people who think they are able to undertake jobs which are out of their league.

Cameron should go join Ms Brooks in her island in the sky or wherever, he does not have the gravitas to deal with the solutions we need to get our young people in work again - his idea of work is to do the nappy changing occasionally - for politics you do not need a multi million trust fund, you need hands on experience in dealing with everything from terrorism to finance.

We know nulab f***ed up, but what the coalition is doing is taking us back to the 70's when there was very little investment in the public sector, job security nil, job satifaction absolutely nil, investment in infrastructure nil.
John Osborne
Posted: 28 May 2012 09:36:06(UTC)
#37

Joined: 13/07/2010(UTC)
Posts: 58

http://uk.finance.yahoo....l-charms-192824029.html
The IMF and Germany support this view within reason.

Ian MacLean-Boyle
Posted: 28 May 2012 10:59:20(UTC)
#38

Joined: 19/05/2012(UTC)
Posts: 2

Will Governments ( of any colour ) not learn from History. We have seen this situation in the late 60's, again in the 70's , 80's' 90s' , but still blunder on. I remember in the mid 70's when mortgage rates topped 15%, lending limited to 2.5 times income, inflation was also close to 15% ( even higher in the late 60's ), but those days I do not remember savers and investors suffering. I may have been young then and let things float over me, but money was short.
In days of "yore" when the FT Index was in the hundreds, the market reacted more to company results, particularly ICI quarterly returns a major indicator of the day. Now the markets seem to be governed by the International political scene. Maybe I will catch up !!!
Rose G
Posted: 28 May 2012 11:51:17(UTC)
#39

Joined: 26/11/2009(UTC)
Posts: 112

Ian

We know governments have short term memory; most of their policies are reactionary to what the media report - why are we in Afghanistan again?

No government wants to listen to people oppose their ideas - if politicians actually were people who took anyone's advise, they would not be politicians. They employ advisers to this that & the other, but very rarely actually take the recommendations from these advisers forward - they would like to be seen to take advise, but they do not actually take advise - they know it all - is this not what they are led to believe by whoever decides to propel these total nonentities into the spotlight?

We have allowed the politicians to write off a whole generation of young people - surely infrastructure projects like the London Olympics could have ensured that local people were employed before those from Europe are - it is all very well employing the cheapest but how come other European countries, like Germany ensure thier work force are in the majority German?

Those in government have a history of selling off sections of the public sector to private financiers in Dubai or Dhoha - there is absolutely no regard for workers in the UK. The sale of other private companies to global consortia has resulted in asset stripping with eventual job losses. Cadburys comes to mind - when the new company took over, they completely went back on their word to keep the UK workforce - how is it that they can act this way with no penalty - we should look at all the solicitors who write up contracts for the NHS for example - who is responsible for drawing up contracts which allow companies to provide products at rock high prices & no penalties for failing to keep to their contracts?

The numbers of quangos who employ people for the government should be taking more cuts as I do not consider some of these to be non jobs created for buddies of politicians.

If young people do not have jobs or prospects of jobs, can we blame them if they act like they did during the summer of 2011?

Clearly all those who rioted last year feel no sense of pride in their community, or their family.
Clive B
Posted: 28 May 2012 12:41:18(UTC)
#40

Joined: 25/11/2010(UTC)
Posts: 508

Thanks: 225 times
Was thanked: 174 time(s) in 101 post(s)
"If young people do not have jobs or prospects of jobs, can we blame them if they act like they did during the summer of 2011?"

can we blame them?
A: yes

The riots were nothing to do with jobs/prospects. The alleged reason for the riots was the police shooting a person 99.9% of the rioters had never met.

Thieving/rioting, pure and simple.
22 Pages«Previous page23456Next page»
+ Reply to discussion

Markets

Other markets