Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Ohhh thats miniscule compared to Thatcher wasting north sea oil revenues, selling off council housing stock, selling off the utilitys, selling off the railways, selling off government services. Selling off everything that moved and ruining the manufacturing and mining industries of this country.

Thatcher and the Tories sell off was far bigger at least 1000 times bigger than anything Brown sold.

And the Headlines tell the story, people thought Brown was a better Chancellor than Osbourne despite all the Tory propoganda and right wing press.

And it comes from a tory polling company.

sticky - do yourself a favour and go and make some money on either dow or ftse indices ...... london is heading into a slough(!!) tomorrow with dow currently down 275

The Aftermath of the Budget, for the Mail on Sunday
22nd – 24th March: sample size 1097

Balls: 29%
Osborne: 28%
Don’t know: 43%


Jubilee, Politics & Monarchy Poll (Daily Star Sunday)
17th-18th May: sample size 1003

Balls: 28%
Osborne: 26%

Welfare & Topical Issues Survey, for the Mail on Sunday
28th – 29th June: sample size 501

Balls: 29%
Osborne: 27%
Don’t know: 44%


As can be seen, the fight between the Chancellor and the Shadow Chancellor for economic credibility, crucial to the message of both parties, has been extremely close ever since the Budget. In three of the six polls since then, the two men have been within 1 percentage point of one another – since May Balls seemed to be inching ahead.

Balls as it, Balls as it.

Brown was an awful chancellor. Don't take any notice of polls showing who the public think was better. They have no way of knowing and just look at their personal circumstances.

Manufacturing fell by more under Wilson than Thatcher. She just got rid of the loss makers like the mines.

Rubbish, your down south and havent a clue.

There were 290 mines closed under Wilson and 160 under Thatcher.

The mines business was very badly handled.

Disgracefull really....mounted police riding down un-armed citizens..the stuff of tyrants.

Thatcher lied though about pit closures as did Heseltine and the ones Thatcher closed would be economical now (well before this blip in oil)Wilson closed down uneconomical surface mines that were at the end of there life.

This is from a Welsh newspaper

http://www.southwales-eveningpost.co.uk/Wilson-closed-mines/story-18821771-detail/story.html

THE detractors of the policies of Margaret Thatcher are still labouring under the misapprehension that it was she who was totally responsible for closing down the mining industry after the bitter dispute of 1984.

This is wrong. The industry was in crisis in the 1960s with the burden of excessive wage demands and cheap imports from China and Eastern Europe.

The unions were in such a parlous state that in 1969 a White Paper was introduced by the Labour MP Barbara Castle entitled In Place of Strife, which was intended to bring some sort of control over the union leaders.

That White Paper was undermined by James Callaghan and eventually dismissed by Harold Wilson, leading to the greater closure of mines during Wilson's two terms in office than in Thatcher's three terms, and yet Wilson is held as the great left wing hero.

What followed when Wilson resigned and Callaghan took over will ever be known as the Winter of Discontent, contributing to the collapse of Labour at the following general election.

The whole miners strike and trouble was down to Scargill. He never gave his members a vote on the strike as he would have lost.

It was badly handled by all concerned, for their own ends.

The mines could have been saved, and would have paid divi's in unemployment terms alone.

Agreed Max, those mines Thatcher closed, well India would bite our hands off for that coal now as would China.

Im afraid Hays lives life reading the Torygraph.

You can buy coal cheaper on the world market than we could ever produce. Coal is a dead product in developed countries. If you want cheap coal then go to China. The pits could never have been saved. We would be just pouring in massive subsidies.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22711416

Coal on the global market is so cheap that it threatens government attempts to tackle climate change, the chairman of the Environment Agency has warned.

The price of coal has been driven down by the dash for shale gas in the US.

Gas is much less polluting than coal, so carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have fallen in the US. But European power generators have gobbled up the resulting cheap coal, driving carbon emissions up in several nations.

Those Germans must be really thick!

They are re-opening their brown coal (shit) mines as we speak.

Here is a Christmas present

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Diabolical-Gift-People-LLP/dp/B00114WHD2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1418247964&sr=8-1&keywords=Grow+your+own+jesus

Grow Your Own Jesus

Haystack Send an email to Haystack View Haystack's profile - 10 Dec 2014 21:35 - 52695 of 52697

You can buy coal cheaper on the world market than we could ever produce. Coal is a dead product in developed countries. If you want cheap coal then go to China. The pits could never have been saved. We would be just pouring in massive subsidies.......ends

Total rubbish Hays explain how Hargreaves (listed company) are mining coal and in Yorkshire and are making a big profit each year.

No subsidies either, you do talk some rubbish at times.

Here we are Hays ........Hargreaves last results notice the £50 million pounds profit no subsidies..............


HARGREAVES SERVICES PLC
(the "Company" or the "Group" or "Hargreaves")

Preliminary results for the year ended 31 May 2014

Hargreaves Services plc (AIM: HSP), the UK's leading supplier of solid fuel and bulk material logistics, announces its preliminary results for the year ended 31 May 2014.

Highlights of the year

Year ended
31 May 2014
Year ended
31 May 2013
Change
%




Continuing Revenue
£869.2m
£843.3m
3.1%
Continuing Operating Profit
£50.9 m
£44.0m
15.7%
Continuing Underlying Operating Profit (1)
£59.5m
£55.7m
6.8%
Continuing Profit before Tax
£52.1m
£43.1m
20.9%
Continuing Underlying Profit before Tax (2)
£55.1m
£52.2m
5.6%
Continuing Diluted EPS
122.2p
111.0p
10.1%
Continuing Underlying Diluted EPS (2)
124.8p
134.6p
(7.3%)
Dividend (including proposed final dividend)
25.5p
20.5p
24.4%
Net Debt (3)
£68.8m
£77.9m
(11.7%)





· Underlying profit before tax from continuing operations increased by 6% to £55.1m
· Strong UK trading volumes and successful expansion of production activities
· Positive end to the year for surface mining with excellent production run rates after earlier delays and exceptional weather conditions
· Five year Industrial Services contract secured with China Light and Power in Hong Kong
· Maltby closure progressing in line with plan
· Strong operating cash flows - net debt reduced to £68.8m at year end
· Recommended full-year dividend increased 24.4% to 25.5p
· Group review and simplification strategy underway
· Disposal of Imperial Tankers for a cash consideration of £26.9m now announced

Commenting on the results, Chairman Tim Ross said:
"This year was challenging for Hargreaves. In difficult market conditions it is testament to the strength of the Group that we are able to announce a 6% increase in profits. The Group achieved strong profitability on all measures. The review of strategy that the Board has commenced will ensure the Group is positioned to minimise risk and optimise shareholder value in response to rapidly evolving markets. The disposal of Imperial Tankers for £26.9m, completed earlier this month, is an encouraging first step."