He's seems to have forgotten that he told us a while ago that the main reason he's doing well is because he speculated on RBS with borrowed money when it nearly went bust during the global financial crisis because the government had guaranteed its survival, so effectively he's a direct beneficiary of government policy and bailouts, and had it gone the wrong way for him he'd be a direct beneficiary of government handouts and foodbanks. No problem with him doing that, and had I thought of it I'd probably have done the same, but to tell everyone else that they shouldn't be relying on the government is utter hypocrisy.
Well done for doing your research.
I didn’t know you found me so interesting to bother to be honest
Yes I did benefit from the Government bailout I suppose if you put it that way
I would say I took a huge risk in putting borrowed money in to what was at the time a lame duck.
Plus,it was pay back time from 9 years previously when Nat West tried to bankrupt me when I personally guaranteed the company’s borrowings to protect jobs at the time , but best not go there, I don’t want to ruin my image on here.
Even worse than that though is, I will also confess to once costing the taxpayer £250 million pounds trading RBS shares
The share was at a very low price but minimum share price movement was 1/4p. On the Stock Market
In those days I traded through a Broker rather than on line and because I placed several million for sale at the same time, as he placed the order to sell, the share price dropped 1/4 of a pence which meant the taxpayers stake dropped £250 million pounds in value.
Shortly after the RBS Board converted the shares in to 1 for 10 to try to stop the speculators making lots of money from small swings in the share price
So as the ultimate capitalist who put personal profit before Country, come the Revolution I should be first in line for the firing squad.