bendy Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 Do you remember a few years back those Euro MP people talking about the 'post democratic era'? I actually took a dump right there . . . in my pants! no i don't, but i have no surprise, how long is it going to be before we are voting asda/tesco? it's already here, just through the democracy medium, what a sham of a word that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Noodle Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 (edited) no i don't, but i have no surprise, how long is it going to be before we are voting asda/tesco? it's already here, just through the democracy medium, what a sham of a word that is. This will really destroy you. Injin's a political lobbyist for big business.* *He's not really obviously. Edited June 21, 2010 by Noodle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Knimbies who say No Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 Fair enough, your inability/unwillingness to put your money in a SIPP or an ISA will leave you exposed to future CGT.. for that you certainly have my sympathy. You have to admit though that yours is an unusual case. well sure, but at the same time it's partly due to the fact that people are conditioned to accept the norms (similar with HPI!). Annuity rates vary wildly on timescales of under a decade, so why anyone thinks it's sensible to try and make pension provision over the course of a few decades in order ultimately be at the mercy of annuity rates is, in my view, not 'normal'! An average person can put their money in a regular pension fund, a SIPP, a cash/shares ISA or NS&I bonds and suffer no CGT at all. They can also buy a house as a primary residence and not incur CGT. If an average person can pay a mortgage, a full stocks/shares ISA allowance and pay a decent amount into a pension.. I challenge you that is no average person. [Edit: Shocking SPaG] I just object to the system being rigged against sensible people making sensible provision. I'm no conspiracy theorist or anything, the system is just rotten. If more people took an interest, it could change for the better. eg, why are pension funds allowed tp earn commission by loaning out stock for the purpose of shorting, damaging the assets of the very people that pay them to look after?! It's nonsensical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Injin Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 This will really destroy you. Injin's a political lobbyist for big business.* *He's not really obviously. Git. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_w_ Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 moltz Didn't know about this. Thanks for the clue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bendy Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 This will really destroy you. Injin's a political lobbyist for big business.* *He's not really obviously. how do you know? how does he know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Noodle Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 how do you know? how does he know? Believe me. Lobbying does exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Storm Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 well sure, but at the same time it's partly due to the fact that people are conditioned to accept the norms (similar with HPI!). Annuity rates vary wildly on timescales of under a decade, so why anyone thinks it's sensible to try and make pension provision over the course of a few decades in order ultimately be at the mercy of annuity rates is, in my view, not 'normal'! I just object to the system being rigged against sensible people making sensible provision. I'm no conspiracy theorist or anything, the system is just rotten. If more people took an interest, it could change for the better. eg, why are pension funds allowed tp earn commission by loaning out stock for the purpose of shorting, damaging the assets of the very people that pay them to look after?! It's nonsensical. Theres little point in havnig a pension anyway. Just make sure you have a paid for house and the government will top up your income to whatever you need to live a comfortable life. If they dont, just sell up and move to Thailand, you can live like a king there for nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Noodle Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 Theres little point in havnig a pension anyway. Just make sure you have a paid for house and the government will top up your income to whatever you need to live a comfortable life. If they dont, just sell up and move to Thailand, you can live like a king there for nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goat Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 hmm, not quite, as there were various caveats, taper reliefs and bands which depended on exactly where the stock was listed (eg AIM or main board). There does not appear to be much talk about the re-installation of any of that. Main one was taper relief. Very nice for business assets but stocks generally and investment properties were non-business with a much lower rate of taper relief - you had to hold for up to 10 years and only got a 40% taper - really only just about made up for inflation. So mostly this is just a return to where we were a couple of years ago. Cutting the annual exempt amount is quite a big change though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libspero Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 If they dont, just sell up and move to Thailand, you can live like a king there for nothing. King Noodle the second, to be precise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Noodle Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 King Noodle the second, to be precise More Pot* Noodle really. *No inferences to narcotics there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Knimbies who say No Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 Main one was taper relief. Very nice for business assets but stocks generally and investment properties were non-business with a much lower rate of taper relief - you had to hold for up to 10 years and only got a 40% taper - really only just about made up for inflation. So mostly this is just a return to where we were a couple of years ago. Cutting the annual exempt amount is quite a big change though. yes, although (my memory is jogged) 'AIM' stocks counted as 'business assets' for some reason. They were mostly anything but 'assets' in my portfolio.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest absolutezero Posted June 21, 2010 Share Posted June 21, 2010 yes, although (my memory is jogged) 'AIM' stocks counted as 'business assets' for some reason. They were mostly anything but 'assets' in my portfolio.... Black hole for cash in mine. One up 64 percent. The others are down between 23 percent and 48 percent. Trading shares? Mug's game. Dividends are your friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.