The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


May's Brexit Speech

Everything related to politics in Cyprus and the rest of the world.

Re: May's Brexit Speech

Postby Robin Hood » Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:21 pm

Tim Drayton wrote:
Paphitis wrote:
Tim Drayton wrote:
Robin Hood wrote:TD:

Don’t say you were not warned that cash under the bed will not be a good long term financial option. Limits on cash transactions, already just €500 in Greece, are only to limit terrorism financing though ...... if you believe that you will believe anything.

http://wolfstreet.com/2017/01/28/europe-limits-on-cash-transactions-war-on-cash/

Similar story but linked to the full EU document.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-27/europe-proposes-restrictions-payments-cash


With reference to drivel: QED.


Yep! Zerohedge and Wolfstreet no less. Couldn't be anymore diabolical.

Let's just use Anarchist sources and fear mongerers as credible sources.

There is no point trying to reason with such people Tim.


It also sadly misses the point because this is not what is meant by 'moving into cash' in the context of stock market investment, as any financial expert should know. Somebody else previously tried to explain this, too. Sheesht!

..... and we agreed on how shares were only a receipt and on how they operate in the financial system ..... but then yo would not have understood that .... way above your pay grade!


A 'Stock Market' investment is cash? Really? Are you two really that dumb? :lol: :lol:

You use your bank deposits, convertible to cash, or as a currency transaction to buy receipts ..... i.e. betting slips, know to you as Shares! You are no longer insured if it all goes belly up. Clever you are not! :roll:

TD:
You should check out what 'cash' is before trying to belittle me! But you are just a smart arse who parrots Paphitis ....... and he knows even less about money/cash/currency than you do!


Definision of CASH. Noun = money in coins or notes, as distinct from cheques, money orders, or credit.
e.g."the staff were paid in cash "NOTE! ..... not shares, or Bonds or any form of financial deposit .......like being paid into their accounts? A share certificate has no face value .....hence it can be neither cash nor currency.

That is why I phrased the question, because it was obvious you didn't understand that 'cash' is just that, 'CASH ' ..... and nothing else. So moving into cash you were not.

synonyms:

money, ready money/cash, currency, legal tender, hard cash; notes, bank notes; coins, coinage, coin, coin of the realm, change, silver, copper; bills; informaldough, bread, loot, the ready, readies, shekels, moolah, wad, boodle, dibs, gelt, ducats, rhino, gravy; informaldosh, brass, lolly, spondulicks, wonga, ackers; informalgreenbacks, dinero, simoleons, bucks, jack, mazuma; informalOscar; informalsplosh, green, tin; datedl.s.d.; informalkale, rocks, shinplasters; formalspecie : "a wallet stuffed with cash"

https://www.google.com.cy/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=Nx2OWM3oApWDaJbnoLAJ&gws_rd=ssl#q=definition+of+cash

I don't see buying shares as moving into cash .... do you? :roll:

You and Paphitis just prove the old adage ..... 'There's one borne every minute'. :roll:
Last edited by Robin Hood on Sun Jan 29, 2017 7:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Robin Hood
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2510
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Limassol

Re: May's Brexit Speech

Postby Paphitis » Mon Jan 30, 2017 1:59 am

Tim Drayton wrote:
Robin Hood wrote:TD:

Don’t say you were not warned that cash under the bed will not be a good long term financial option. Limits on cash transactions, already just €500 in Greece, are only to limit terrorism financing though ...... if you believe that you will believe anything.

http://wolfstreet.com/2017/01/28/europe-limits-on-cash-transactions-war-on-cash/

Similar story but linked to the full EU document.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-27/europe-proposes-restrictions-payments-cash


With reference to drivel: QED.


drivel indeed.

The banks don't care about what amounts of cash you move around. As far as they are concerned, the more you move around the better, especially when you go to one of their branches and deposit a brief case of notes. That is their bread and butter. And they make Billions in Transaction Fees too from their entire customer bases.

They only care because they are legislated by the Authorities to care. Transactions above $10,000 dollars are referred to an Agency for auditing. In Australia it's called AUSTRAC. From there, the information is dispersed to other Authorities and Agencies, including ASIO and Federal Police. So if you go into a branch, deposit $10,000 dollars, the authorities are given some kind of automatic alert where the transaction is flagged.

http://www.austrac.gov.au/

Then the authorities may look into where the money came from, whether you paid tax on it, whether you sold something or whether the funds were gained illegally.

Transactions from the Share Market deposited into an account are usually from a clearing house or broker and easily tracked by the authorities. It's pretty impossible hiding these transactions because they are reviewed by the Securities and Investments Commission plus the shares are usually franked with tax already paid for.

When I refer to the authorities, I mean the following:
1) Tax Office,
2) Federal Police,
3) Security Agencies even,
4) Social Security,
5) Securities and Investments Commission - which is the Corporate Governance Watch Dog or cop if you like.

They all have the powers to get information from banks whenever they want to to, and there is mandatory reporting for transactions above $10,000 otherwise the bank gets into trouble.

Sorry if this is way off track, but I don't read posts from the other pest so rely on you for context.
User avatar
Paphitis
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 20971
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 2:06 pm

Re: May's Brexit Speech

Postby Robin Hood » Tue Jan 31, 2017 2:34 pm

Paphitis:
I have decided to reselect you ...... I missed the entertainment ..... life became dull ..... no meaning any more ....... the dog got fed up with ‘walkies’ and the wife keeps finding me things to do .......so I thought, “What the hell ..... I’ll go back to upsetting Paphitis! “ :lol: :lol:


Tim Drayton:
And a person who claims to be an expert on economics and finance yet thinks if somebody talks about 'selling shares and moving into cash' this means they physically have boxes of cash at home. Give me a break.

Firstly, I have NEVER claimed to be a financial expert, that is just your opinion, formed by someone who clearly has difficulty with the English language. I know a lot more about economics than you because I learned from experience that what you (and I did at the time) believe to be how the system works, is not true. I understand the scaffolding that creates and supports the structure of money creation and particularly the banking/financial systems. How the banks then do their accounting is of little or no interest to me.

Tim Drayton stated: “Well, I've sold out and gone 100% cash. Don't say I didn't tell you.”

I tried to explain to you that there is a Worldwide proposal by the banks, and supported by institutions, countries, the EU, World Bank etc. to create a cashless society. Had you been doing what you said you were doing ....... which you obviously were not ....... then holding CASH (as previously defined for you) was not a good idea. Had you followed events recently in India you would have seen why. So, your statement was very misleading!

You obviously have difficulty expressing yourself in English? You said you were moving into cash, but that was not what you meant? You were moving something (Shares?) into cash .... that wasn’t really cash? I have given you the definition of cash but it is clearly difficult for you to comprehend what cash is? So what is this cash you have ....that isn’t cash? :?:

Conclusion.... you don’t know what you are talking about? I wrongly assumed that what you said, was what you meant, I was obviously wrong again?

BTW: I know of at least one Cypriot that does just that , he hides 1000’s in CASH (Euro Bank notes) all over the place , (he panicked when the banks suddenly stopped accepting the €500 note) ........ he does so because he does not trust the banks, post ‘bail-in’, and I do not believe he is the only one! But not for long! :roll:

Paphitis:
The stupid idiot has no grasp of reality.
:lol: :lol:
A remark coming from someone like you who proves constantly he lives in his own cloud cuckoo fantasy land ..... is bloody hilarious.

This ‘stupid idiot’ has his feet firmly on the ground. I am pragmatic and don’t imagine myself as some top notch military officer, running a war single handed, in a country I have never even been to and a conflict I do not understand. Neither do I spout assumed knowledge on a monetary system that I do not understand. I am also reasonably intelligent enough to tell the difference between credibility, propaganda, fake news and lies. Idiot? ..... vulnerable people living in glass houses should not throw stones. :!:
Someone who buys and sells shares, is the least likely to have boxes of cash at home.

Well, not strictly true .... in boxes and suitcases maybe, in great quantity, no ......... but converting cash into a bank account entry, in many and various bank accounts, in multiple banks and location, very likely. I expect this game is very familiar to you.

But you can’t hide money that way. CASH .... if you understand what that means ...... is anonymous and difficult to track i.e.untraceable! Hence the reason banks and governments are keen to see the back of cash, First stop .....limit cash transactions. That is common sense once it is pointed out and has already started.
It's unsafe, stupid, and no benefit to derive in doing so.

The benefits are obvious to governments and also to banks! Have you never paid CASH to avoid VAT/sales tax? Millions in cash changes hands every day ..... from an individual getting a builder to do a job ‘cash-in-hand’ ........ to bundles of cash moving through the terrorist community ....... to large conglomerates bribing official for contracts ...... and of course drugs. The clear benefit is ..... it is untraceable!

This is why they make it difficult to launder the cash into a bank account ...... even if you are a cocky Aus who believes he is an exception and can dump a briefcase full of cash onto the bank counter and they will just put it into his account This is exactly why there is a move to limit cash transactions and as I tried to point out, it is already being implemented in some countries.
Transaction like these are already on the radar, and having the proceeds stuffed into a pillow case isn't going to do anything other than make it a lot harder to buy other shares.

You are as usual, trying to teach Grandma how to suck eggs! You are parroting EXACTLY what I explained to your friend but just like you, he was just arrogant and too dumb to see it!

It is just a pity that you two are far more interested in trying to prove you are smart, rather than engaging in a sensible conversation with someone who eventually learned (too late) how the game is played ........I learned the hard way. :(

Paphitis:

You and Mr Drayton are just the sort of people these parasites feed on, because you are ignorant of the way the system works, you both think you are smart and you have more money than sense, going by the content of your many boasts and claims on the subject of money creation and the banking system

I was ignorant just like you two, and it seems a lot of other people, until some 14 years ago. I learned my lesson the hard way by a very expensive series of mistakes because I trusted ‘financial experts’ and ‘Bankers’. I vowed ‘Never again!’ and I learned everything I could on ‘The System’ from the roots up and I certainly didn’t get the information from a bank clerk or even my local branch Manager.

These sort of people could never do it to me today, I am much wiser, although a lot poorer. That is why I try to pass on what I have learned over many years to people like you who really don’t have a clue...... unfortunately you seem to think you do. I could almost weep when I read some of your misconceptions ....... but to quote your friend, ‘Don’t say I didn’t warn you!

This case may interest you:



Unofficial estimates believe it could be up to a billion!

This lady was on BBC Radio 5 this morning. She went from running a successful and thriving business to getting cleaned out. All she did was ask the bank for a loan. Her story was heart breaking and I could really empathise with her, because there is NOTHING you can do about it once they have pounced ..... you are screwed! As the CEO of a major international Bank said to me ..... “You can’t afford to sue us!”. He was right .... well, partially!. :)

“Victim Joanne Dove, who lost her business, home and marriage through the fraud, said: ‘It was financial rape... I lost everything, my reputation, all our money, all our pension schemes.”

Beware Koala ...... the banks are not your friend ...... they see you as their next meal ..... the more you have, the better the banquet. If you are stupid enough to think this is a ‘one-off’......... I suggest you do a bit more reading instead of just skimming the headlines. :roll:
Robin Hood
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2510
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Limassol

Re: May's Brexit Speech

Postby Tim Drayton » Tue Jan 31, 2017 5:28 pm

Londonrake wrote:
Tim Drayton wrote:Here we go, round and round the same mulberry bush again. For example, Labour won the 1997 general election with 418 seats and 43.2% of the votes. That was a majority. The tories had previously been in government for 17 years, but now they were in the minority, so by your logic they had to shut down and not act as an opposition party, otherwise they would be 'bad losers' and 'moaners'.


The analogy is false and difference glaring.


I notice that Kenneth Clarke shares my view. Speaking in today's debate on triggering Article 50:

Let me give an analogy in explaining the position for members of parliament after this referendum. I have fought Lord knows how many election over the past 50 years and I have always advocated voting Conservative. The British public in their wisdom have occasionally failed to take my advice and they have actually by a majority voted Labour. And I have found myself here facing a Labour government.

I do not recall an occasion where I was told it was now my democratic duty to support Labour policies under Labour governments on the other side of the House. That proposition would have been treated with ridicule and scorn.
User avatar
Tim Drayton
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8226
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 1:32 am
Location: Limassol/Lemesos

Re: May's Brexit Speech

Postby Robin Hood » Tue Jan 31, 2017 6:45 pm

I think ‘always the bridesmaid but never the bride’ seems applicable.

I do not recall an occasion where I was told it was now my democratic duty to support Labour policies under Labour governments on the other side of the House. That proposition would have been treated with ridicule and scorn.


I always understood that if you had personal views that did not go along with the Management’s, you either gave in and followed ‘Company policy’ or you resigned. :roll:

Kenneth Clarke:

Clarke contested the Conservative Party leadership three times – in 1997, 2001 and 2005 – being defeated each time. Opinion polls indicated he was more popular with the general public than with his Party, whose generally Euro-sceptic stance did not chime with his pro-European views. Notably, he is President of the Conservative Europe Group, Co-President of the pro-EU body British Influence and Vice-President of the European Movement UK.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Clarke


I think it would be fair to suggest he is a 'Remainer' ? But is that relevant now, the decision has been made? :?:
Robin Hood
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2510
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Limassol

Re: May's Brexit Speech

Postby Londonrake » Wed Feb 01, 2017 6:23 pm

Tim Drayton wrote:
Londonrake wrote:
Tim Drayton wrote:Here we go, round and round the same mulberry bush again. For example, Labour won the 1997 general election with 418 seats and 43.2% of the votes. That was a majority. The tories had previously been in government for 17 years, but now they were in the minority, so by your logic they had to shut down and not act as an opposition party, otherwise they would be 'bad losers' and 'moaners'.


The analogy is false and difference glaring.


I notice that Kenneth Clarke shares my view. Speaking in today's debate on triggering Article 50:

Let me give an analogy in explaining the position for members of parliament after this referendum. I have fought Lord knows how many election over the past 50 years and I have always advocated voting Conservative. The British public in their wisdom have occasionally failed to take my advice and they have actually by a majority voted Labour. And I have found myself here facing a Labour government.

I do not recall an occasion where I was told it was now my democratic duty to support Labour policies under Labour governments on the other side of the House. That proposition would have been treated with ridicule and scorn.


Thank you for quoting me and commenting on such. Does this mean I am out of purdha? :lol:

As RH infers, Ken is a sort of Tory, Dennis Skinner.

It always seemed to me that on a slow news day a good way to generate a front page headline was to wheel out Ken and Michael and ask them to pontificate on the EU. The 4" headline would then be "Torys split on EU!!!"

I met him once. A long time ago. He was bound for the Conservative conference, which back then in the early 90s was being held in Inverness. That was long ago of course when they had quite a few MPs in Scotland. He struck me as an arrogant and very self opionated man. I know - about par for a politician!

But we come back to the same analogy - surely?

When (if!!) the UK leaves the EU, you are perfectly entitled to vote for any political party which campaigns on a rejoining ticket. That is your right. Clarke wasn't advocating trying to overturn the GE results, he accepted opposition. There's much of a difference in what's going on nowadays. However much you deplore it, if the UK doesn't leave (and I mean really leave) the EU there will, IMHO, be blood on the streets. No grudging acceptance and a "Let's move on" attitude. Whatever your POV, it's far. far too late.
Londonrake
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 623
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2015 6:19 pm
Location: ROC

Re: May's Brexit Speech

Postby Londonrake » Wed Feb 01, 2017 6:58 pm

Ken Clarke:

"I look forward to the day when the Westminster Parliament is just a council chamber in Europe".


Personally - and I suspect I may speak for very many millions of others - I have a fundamental problem with that concept. :wink:

Little Englanders Inc :wink:
Londonrake
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 623
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2015 6:19 pm
Location: ROC

Re: May's Brexit Speech

Postby Paphitis » Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:03 am

Bank of Singapore is a business partner. They are 20% business equity partners for a big development project plus some other related stuff at 1% interest.

PAPHITIS IS A BANK PARASITE! 8)

After that, I'm running for Australian PM and God help you all. You think trump is bad! :lol:

Image
User avatar
Paphitis
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 20971
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 2:06 pm

Re: May's Brexit Speech

Postby Paphitis » Thu Feb 02, 2017 1:28 am

If there was another BREXIT vote, the BREXITERS would win by more.

All this behavior from politicians and the rhetoric about little Englanders and racists etc will only cause the BREXIT vote to go higher.

At this point, I actually believe another referendum would do BREXIT a world of good due to the deplorable behaviour coming from the remain camp.
User avatar
Paphitis
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 20971
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 2:06 pm

Re: May's Brexit Speech

Postby Robin Hood » Thu Feb 02, 2017 7:55 am

Paphitis wrote:If there was another BREXIT vote, the BREXITERS would win by more.

All this behavior from politicians and the rhetoric about little Englanders and racists etc will only cause the BREXIT vote to go higher.

At this point, I actually believe another referendum would do BREXIT a world of good due to the deplorable behaviour coming from the remain camp.


I think you are absolutely right .
Robin Hood
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2510
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Limassol

PreviousNext

Return to Politics and Elections

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests