"British assets gain, mid-cap stocks lead after Labour election win"
About time too. The mid caps invest here, not Australian miners, Chinese EVs, American NASDAQ."British assets gain, mid-cap stocks lead after Labour election win"
I think this is what is known as a non sequitur.About time too. The mid caps invest here, not Australian miners, Chinese EVs, American NASDAQ.
I think this is what is known as a non sequitur.
I have no idea
That was a reply to lenny. Last Friday, the FTSE250 jumped 1.5%I think this is what is known as a non sequitur.
I have no idea what it means or how it relates to anything said above.
No.Has the UK been suckered into destroying its capacity to make virgin steel from iron ore by a foolish devotion to the green agenda?
you can always make steel with different chemistries but it's not the point. Tata is making a loss at Port Talbot so it has zero interest to continue to operate the blast furnaces. It is motivated to either modernise or close down. Our conservative governments did not like to subsidise industry just to protect jobs. Labour government may do things differently.I know of no way to make virgin steel without significant carbon emissions. If you do know how to make NEW steel from iron ore without adding a lot of carbon, please do tell how. I think it is a matter of chemistry and not idiology.
not true. You can make things in different ways but making things competitively is much harder, usually requiring bigger investment. That's why I made the point about as a country, we need to invest our savings more in industries and less in properties.High quality and speciality steels needed by an advanced economy can not be made from recycled scrap steel. Steels needed by many of our industries will have to be imported from China and elsewhere.
Thank you for the clarification.That was a reply to lenny. Last Friday, the FTSE250 jumped 1.5%
We have about £100bn in cash ISAs. This money isn't productive. It was suggested that Labour should change the rules on ISAs to force the momey be invested in a more productive market.
LSE is big, second only to the NSE. It manages a lot of assets but those are mainly in rest of the world. invested in big sectors like virtual currencies, mining, social networking, banking and electronics. It does not generate much new jobs for the UK. The mid caps where the market caps are less than £10bn are prominently uk base, such as housebuilding, supermarkets, renewables, generators, software engineering, aeronautics, boat building etc I am pretty sure Labour would look to stimulate those sectors that provide more employment here than just profits.
I invest mainly in medium caps.
The problem is not where they invest, it's how much they take out of the fund for themselves. I ran two ISAs at the same time over about 8 years. One was in the RBS managed fund. It lost about £500 in that time. The other was in a self-managed equities ISA, which tripled in value even though i had no experience, skills or knowledge about equities. They both invested in mainly FTSE100 companies.That was a reply to lenny. Last Friday, the FTSE250 jumped 1.5%
We have about £100bn in cash ISAs. This money isn't productive. It was suggested that Labour should change the rules on ISAs to force the momey be invested in a more productive market.
LSE is big, second only to the NSE. It manages a lot of assets but those are mainly in rest of the world. invested in big sectors like virtual currencies, mining, social networking, banking and electronics. It does not generate much new jobs for the UK. The mid caps where the market caps are less than £10bn are prominently uk base, such as housebuilding, supermarkets, renewables, generators, software engineering, aeronautics, boat building etc I am pretty sure Labour would look to stimulate those sectors that provide more employment here than just profits.
I invest mainly in medium caps.
I agree with the last point. We do need to invest more in industry. A HUGE amount more. And government should lead that process.No.
you can always make steel with different chemistries but it's not the point. Tata is making a loss at Port Talbot so it has zero interest to continue to operate the blast furnaces. It is motivated to either modernise or close down. Our conservative governments did not like to subsidise industry just to protect jobs. Labour government may do things differently.
not true. You can make things in different ways but making things competitively is much harder, usually requiring bigger investment. That's why I made the point about as a country, we need to invest our savings more in industries and less in properties.
Yes, I agree with that.Woosh said:That's why I made the point about as a country, we need to invest our savings more in industries and less in properties.
From your linkI have never seen any technical discussion which says you can make high quality, steel for technical applications from scrap.