Did you know under Labour's Watch...

[Grigsy]

...you got and could still get £250 for your child under their Child Trust Fund Scheme. Did you know that Mums? It was Labour that introduced the Child Trust Fund. So when your child and everyone elses child is 18 they will be able to join the very few elite that we call 'Trustafarians', you know, the ones that don't work for a living?

Did you know that under the 'Coalition of Cuts' that the Tories and Liberals will bring will mean bye, bye to the Child Trust Fund. So, that means, any more children you have will not get a cheque for £250 to put in whatever account you decide for your little miracle. That sucks right?

OK, want more?

Did you know that Maternity Leave has been extended to 9 months...from 6 months. But did you also know that after 6 months, parents can decide who takes the 3 months. So on top of the Labour's initiative of Paternity Leave (which has been extended to a month now rather than just 2 weeks) - Dad's can have 3 months with their babies when they are between 6-9 months old. How fab is that?! For everyone....yippee, some much needed siesta time for tired Mums...

Under a Labour Government, should we be so lucky, guess what....they want to extend the Maternity Leave to eventually get to 12 months...that's cool.

Also, hope you are all enjoying the reduced Nursery fees that you probably noticed after your child turned 3. Well guess what, that was also under Labour's watch. My fees for my daughter were £457 per month when she was 2. When she was 3 they were £238 per month. I'm delighted. But should the Tories get in, they plan to introduce 'Top Up Fees', so it will be Goodbye Grant and Hello, I'm skint.

Look, you are welcome to join my debate but please before you do, put aside your pre-conceptions and perhaps even get all 3 parties manifestos. You can do this by going online and go to their respective official sites. To be honest, after looking at all 3 my findings were this:

Nick Clegg, Nice but Dim (sorry), it is almost as if they wrote their policies on the back of an envelope at a dinner party. They mean well but seriously we need substance right now. Look at what's going on in Greece. Who do you want to guide us through these harsh times of austerity? We need prudence not wishy washy policies of some man who seems perfectly nice, but seriously, we are talking about the toughest job in the country. And it's not paid as well as you think. Infact, Gordon Brown took a cut of 1/4 of his salary. Sometimes I wonder, has Nick Clegg actually seen a Job Description for the Prime Minister!!

David Cameron - OK, he's got the gift of the gab but think it's very important to remind ourselves of what and who the Tories actually are. If interested, go to You Tube, and watch COMMON PEOPLE 2010.

Gordon Brown - well, as I said before. Here is a man of substance. Here is an unsung hero. Here is a quiet man with a big agenda. Modest, kind, truthful and a human being of the greatest integrity. He is a good man. Why don't you just look at his wife. Sarah Brown. She is a gentle, kind, serene and entirely beautiful woman. She is also highly intelligent and inspirational in many charities and other very important areas. But above all, Gordon and Sarah Brown are parents. They truly care. They know how important the first 48 months of a childs life is. If you don't buy me, then why not find out for yourself. Go onto the Labour Party Offical site. And watch him in action.

Off for a hot bath now

Ta-ra

Happy Bank Holiday!!!

Sarah

x

TDiddy, RBS made a loss of about £28bn in 2008, and £3.6bn in 2009. I can't remember the exact figure of the total bank bailout, but it is in the hundreds of billions. At that rate it might take a century of profits to pay us back. That's without the danger of any of these high finance high-wire trapeze artists pulling off some more stunts that generate even more losses.

"the quickest way for us to repay the national debt would be for RBS and Lloyds share price to continue to rise. Give it a couple of years!"

I think you've been swallowing the bankers line and partaking of their champagne, which we kindly pay for. I think a couple of years is a bit optimistic, it may be more like a couple of centuries.

claig - I think it would take about 32p rise in the RBS share price to cover your 34BN loss. I will check but that was the figure that I was given a few weeks ago. So I really don't think you have looked at this properly. Check how much RBS share price has risen recently and how much "head room" there is.

1BN for every 1p increase in share price is what we the taxpayer benefits, to my knowledge!!! They don't tell you this in the Daily mail do they?

claig - i apologise if that sounded patronising but I am frustrated by the lack of facts in your arguments and the fact that your arguments don't seem substantiated.

TDiddy, no they don't tell us that in the Daily Mail. If it was as simple as that, I reckon the politicians wouldn't stop telling us about it, they'd be screaming it from the rooftops.

A 32p rise in the share price is a more than 50% rise from now. RBS profits were £10bn in 2007, followed by a loss of £24bn in 2008. Most financial pundits didn't see it coming. I don't have a lot of faith in what the financial pundits say, tomorrow they may discover some more black holes if certain sovereign countries have to renegotiate their debts

I don't think every child should be given £250. That is why we are so damn broke as a country.

I don't have as much faith in the facts and figures that you hold so much store by. I bet Bernie Madoff's figures looked hunky dory before it all collapsed around his ears and he was led to his jail cell.

This thread is making me feel very very peculiar.

I'm sure I've met Grigsy and felt very very peculiar then.

claig - i will leave you to belive that it is all made up....no point in arguing if you want us to all revert to your version of fiction

This thread is hilarious. I feel like Grisgy has given us all a pat on the head. Arf.

TDiddy,
Two years and it will all be sorted, you reckon, boom profits you say. I will leave you to continue believing in the man in the moon.

claig - didn't say that it would be all sorted. I DID say that the Govt is on course to make handsome profits from RBS and LLoyds. I don't think that I am entirely original in that thinking. And err, just have a look at how much they paid for the sharees and recent share prices. Nothing imaginary about that....

..And your argument?...you say that RBS is just another Mardoff...

Claig - if you really have this view on RBS shares then you could "short" the shares at the click of the mouse. here

you don't have to believe me. I just googled and found that RBS?Lloyds even at these levels are showing 9BN profit for the tax payer. And then RBS has to pay the govt a few BN under the asset protection scheme. Not a bad trade for the taxpayer after all!!

I prefer a fact based discussion when we start talking on this subject. There was a lot of bad financial journalism before and during the crisis.

TDiddy, I'm saying that I don't believe the figures that financial pundits quote. These are the same pundits who couldn't see the disaster coming and who recommended Madoff. If they tell me that RBS is a great investment, I take it with a pinch of salt.
RBS made business decisions that caused it to have the biggest corporate losses in British history. If you think that it could never happen again and that the garden is now rosy, then you should invest in them along with the government. I'm a little more conservative, I'll stick to Tesco.

Claig - it's simple, the Govt bought the shares 9BN cheaper than the level at which they are trading. Madoff scepticism is irrelevant, I think.

"So when your child and everyone elses child is 18 they will be able to join the very few elite that we call 'Trustafarians', you know, the ones that don't work for a living?"

The salient point from this thread, is that by saving £250 a year each for the DCs (I have to do the saving because they are too old for CTFs) will ensure that they never have to work again.

Tell me, OP, do you work for the Financial Services Industry? Because I think you might have sold me an endowment scheme in 1992.

has everyone on MN just start election partying already and they're completely rat-arsed?

or on drugs?

TDiddy - the article you quoted makes an interesting point, which I mentioned earlier, why aren't they shouting about it from the rooftops?

"The City wonders why the government is not shouting about the rise in the bank shares, given that Labour is trailing in the polls. One analyst, who declined to be named, said: "I'm surprised that Gordon Brown is not making more of the bank shares."

If they tried to realise their paper profit by selling in the market, the price would soon drop and they wouldn't get their £9bn. So it looks like they will eventually try to sell it to Sid, the inexperienced private investor, rather than the professionals. You'll be told that the shares are a bargain, then you can join Sid and snap the shares up.

But I think you should keep a close eye on the news and try to see what may lie around the corner. What may happen if Spain and Portugal follow Greece, how this will affect French and German banks, and what might happen to banks in other countries. But to you it's simple, you're an optimist, you believe the forecasts. As you say, I am more sceptical. I just think it's better to be safe than sorry.

TDiddy / Claig - Tim Harford was talking about the cost of the bank bailout (and it's contribution to the national debt) last week on radio 4 (I heard it on the More or Less Podcast). And yes, even at current share prices the investment is almost back to what we the taxpayer paid out (with either a small loss or small profit predicted in the medium term). Obviously, the investment has to be realised (by selling the shares).

The main impact on national debt was caused by the recession (which was caused by the credit crunch and banking crisis) twinned with record levels of public spending.

I recommend the More or Less podcast to anyone really interested in the numbers behind the news stories.

CLaig - You seem to talk in vague generalities. Yes, it is prudent for the Govt to keep cool about the price so that people don't think that it is a "sell" and try to "front run" but most people in the City see it going north. If you are confident about your view then why not go short. I am happy to go long. One of the internet brokers will actually match our trades if you are confident. There is a lot of hot air that the tabloids come out with cos they want DC to win but let's deal with the facts.

Was grigsy on Ecstasy?

jackstarbright, I agree that the recession was caused by the credit crunch and the banking crisis. But these were caused by loss of faith in the banking system and a breakdown in the inter-bank lending market, because many banks were effectively insolvent. This is why governments had to prop the banks up by pumping billions into them. According to the article linked by TDiddy, the taxpayer pumped £75 billion into Lloyds and RBS. The shares are currently showing a paper profit of £9bn. I will listen to Harford's podcast to see how the shortfall has been made up. But, I agree with the analyst who declined to be named, why would the politicians hide their light under a bushel and not loudly proclaim what a success their investment in the banks had been, if the taxpayer has now been fuly repaid?

fabhead, Grigsy was definitely a sixties style hippie spreading good vibes of peace and love around. I think she was high on something