Tory guff about class war

I'm not convinced that any kind of "class war" strategy is the way the get people to vote Labour, and it's worth pointing out just how little evidence there is of such a strategy in operation. There's the joke about Eton and... err...

But one thing I am sure about is that it's total rubbish - willingly lapped up in some quarters - that the Tories somehow positively enjoy Labour talking about class. This is patently obviously a weakpoint for NuDave and Gideon, hence all the stupidity about double-barrelled names.

Not worried at all, honest guv...

Mr Cameron is seen to be on the side of the rich over ordinary people, by 50 per cent to 42 per cent.

The joy of snow

Quick question

Does anyone know what happened to equities the day of the 1997 Budget? Given that the Government abolished tax credits on dividends you might expect them to have dropped, to take account of the diminished future income stream that must surely have been expected. Or had investors already factored the probability of tax credits being abolished into their valuations?

I don't remember there being a big drop on the day, but maybe I'm mistaken. So if not, what's the story?

Bloggers down....

Have Charlie and Duncan hung up their keyboards?

Sorry, NAPF!

In last night's post I contrasted the ABI's recent missive to the FTSE350 with the apparent silence on the part of the NAPF and the IMA. It turns out that (not for the first time) I shouted into the internet too quickly, and that the NAPF had actually also written to the FTSE350 with its own concerns about remuneration back in November. So there you are.

Hat-tip: Cheapside House Command Bunker

Bits & bobs

1. Saturday's FT editorial here about the return of bonuses in the banking industry is worth a read. It's very sceptical that this has much to do with the value of what is being provided by those getting the rewards, and the key point is that basically shareholders are being (willingly?) taken for a ride.

2. But then over on the Torygraph we read about how the ABI (yep, them again - where are the NAPF and the IMA?) is warning companies to be sensible about pay of face opposition.

3. A quick snippet from a book that I ordered at the end of last year that I'm yet to start, but which looks well interesting - The Ownership of Enterprise. It takes a look at why different forms of ownership appear in different industries, so quite a lot in there about employee ownership.

In firms that are incorporated... formal control generally involves only the right to elect the firm's board of directors and to vote on a relatively small set of fundamental issues, such as merger or dissolution of the firm. Moreover, in large business corporations the shareholders, who have formal control, are often too numerous and too dispersed to exercise even these limited voting rights very meaningfully, with the result that corporate managers have substantial autonomy.

Err... that's all you really need to know to get started in the ownership debate right now, isn't it?

Labour Against The Machine vs Dave Cowell-eron

In one corner a left-wing outfit led by a frontman (allegedly) prone to expletive-laden outbursts, achieved mainstream popularity in the 1990s, but their support has faded away since.

In the other corner a highly-polished newcomer. He certainly looks and sounds the part, but his lyrics don't seem to actually mean anything, and you feel like it's a synthetic product somehow.

I'm with Cheryl Cole this time.