Brexit the economy and house prices part 6

cogito

Herzlos wrote: »

Can you tell me where I'm wrong?
What I've read indicates the proposal is that 10% of shares/equity in a company over 250 employees goes into a fund which will pay a dividend of up to £500 to each holder, with any surplus going to a social fund.


It seems like a fairly clunky way of doing it but I don't see how that invalidates any of my statement. You're presumably the expert on this, so I defer to your corrections.

Even the Graun thinks its rubbish.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2018/sep/24/john-mcdonnell-is-not-offering-workers-real-share-ownership

If most of the dividends end up going to the government, it's just another tax grab which could be done much more easily by increasing corporation tax.

And who are the workers representatives who will administer it? None other than the unions of course and not the workers in individual companies who are supposed to benefit.

Herzlos

There's certainly a huge overhead in running it, and I don't agree with any excess going to the government (which is essentially a tax grab), but I'm not sure how many employees would be looking at hitting the full £500 anyway. They use Lloyds as an example but it's got a fairly high profit:employee ratio. For somewhere like Asda, Poundworld or Royal Mail, would they get close to £500/each?


I've never actually said it's a good idea, because I don't think it is, but it's also not the government confiscating 10% of shares in all large companies, as it was originally claimed to be.


It'd be much more cost effective and better for employees if there was just a mechanism by which staff are allowed to purchase shares in their own company, owned outright and directly, at some preferential rate (either a discount or to have some small number of shares gifted over time). Then they can do what they want with them, and can take them with them into retirement/redundancy/etc.

Carl31

cogito wrote: »

Even the Graun thinks its rubbish.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2018/sep/24/john-mcdonnell-is-not-offering-workers-real-share-ownership

If most of the dividends end up going to the government, it's just another tax grab which could be done much more easily by increasing corporation tax.

And who are the workers representatives who will administer it? None other than the unions of course and not the workers in individual companies who are supposed to benefit.

I doubt the tax aspect is the thinking about it though, more like a way of encouraging workers vote by introducing to them a new "benefit"

Introducing new shares without capital in return just dilutes the worth of any existing shares, probably reducing share value, so no one really benefits. The usual ill thought out idea

Moby

Excellent line in Jezza's speech:-


'The Tory Brexiteers unite the politics of the 1950s with the economics of the 19th century, daydreaming about a Britannia that both rules the waves and waives the rules.'
I'd be proud of that one!

Rinoa

Moby wrote: »

Excellent line in Jezza's speech:-


'The Tory Brexiteers unite the politics of the 1950s with the economics of the 19th century, daydreaming about a Britannia that both rules the waves and waives the rules.'
I'd be proud of that one!

Does he still mention how Venezuela is showing the world the benefits of socialism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FbWsINjpRY

Joan_number_1_2

Rinoa wrote: »

Does he still mention how Venezuela is showing the world the benefits of socialism.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FbWsINjpRY

He's too busy thinking of bankrupting the country by renationalising everything, yet Brexiters are the ones supposedly living in the past!
:rotfl:

It's strange how some folk can be so concerned about Brexit maybe causing economic harm but loving Labour who most certainly would cause far greater economic harm.

andrewf75

Daniel54 wrote: »

One of the vey best commentators out there is ( Professor) Chris Grey.Succinct,well written,clear minded

Britain is humiliating itself

Why?

Because of our failure to ackowledge reality

What is that reality?

The failure to ackowledge the binary choice between single market membership and non membership.

This was not a choice made in the referendum but in Government /Mrs May decisions subsequently

Spot on

It did not have to be this way

http://chrisgreybrexitblog.blogspot.com/2018/09/britain-is-humiliating-itself.html

This is absolutely spot on.

Its incredible that we have come this far and so many people still can’t see this, including senior government figures - who surely must see it but choose to try and deceive us.

The current fiasco is not due to remainers trying to obstruct things or the EU trying to punish us, it is because the leave side won’t take responsibility for the implications of winning the vote!

Thrugelmir

Carl31 wrote: »

I doubt the tax aspect is the thinking about it though,

How else would the Corbyn Government fund it's plans? If you want to sell a plan to the electorate omit the important details. The concept would raise billions.

Found it amusing that one of the architects of the plan is a solicitor. His partnership currently don't operate a profit sharing scheme for their employees. Preach for distribution of wealth but not out of my pocket!

.string.

This is unforgivable.

[https://news.sky.com/story/jeremy-corbyn-heads-to-brussels-to-meet-eus-chief-brexit-negotiator-11509935]

I find it difficult to express the extent of my utter contempt at Corbyn's visit and the thinking that led to it.

The UK is at the most critical stage in it's negotiations with the EU and Corbyn will do nothing but pass a message, deliberate or not but I suspect the former, to the EU that they should stonewall their side of the negotiations and thd UK negotiation stance will collapse through parliamentary stagnation, to be replaced by a compliant "Labour Party" who wish to do exactly what the EU wants, namely remain in the EU- controlled Common Market.

In my view the "Labour Party" is not currently in the National Interest and needs to be replaced by something more sensible.

Herzlos

Joan_number_1 wrote: »

He's too busy thinking of bankrupting the country by renationalising everything, yet Brexiters are the ones supposedly living in the past!
:rotfl:

It's strange how some folk can be so concerned about Brexit maybe causing economic harm but loving Labour who most certainly would cause far greater economic harm.

Brexit has already caused economic harm. So have the Tories. May as well let Labour have a pop.

I mean, what's wrong with hospitals and trains running properly? Why is state ownership bad when it's us but works fine for everyone else?