GDP shocka

[Gun]

I'd go along with us never really coming out of the recession, well my industry certainly hasn't. I know of billions and billions of pounds worth of building work that's been shelved just in the last 12 months or so. We're far from being out of the woods yet and if this year turns out to be anything like last year then I'm really going to struggle to see the year through in my line of work.

[Digga]

oyster said:

fesuvious said:

Thinking of a customer of ours;

Went into rented Mid 2008 ('market is crashing, want to have cash') and is now in rented.

Rental £1500 per month. In the market for a house of @£500k

Total rental costs to date knocking on for £30k.

No sign of buying just yet, so assuming we stick another 4 months on that...we are at £35k.

Has the £500k house they sold fallen in value by £35k, yes, Id say so, easily.

Are they better off? Errmmm, Il let you chaps decide that one.

From mid 2008 to now it may have a fallen by about 10% or so.

But when they buy it back they'll have to fork out a further £15/20k in stamp duty. And then there's moving costs to add to it.

And mortgage deals aren't as good now as they were.

Financially there isn't much in it. However your customer has 2 additional house moves to deal with in his life - I hope he enjoys them.

using this comparison, I'm not thoroughly convinced of the merits of renting. Perhaps, on a longer view - if proces dip further - it might pan out, but absolute falls are less likely than inflation based 'real' falls.

[zakelwe]

pilchardthecat said:

NoelWatson said:

pilchardthecat said:

"until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Is that because their parents got greedy and got swept up in the property bubble, hoping for instand riches, overleveraged, an blew up? Or have I got the wrong parents?

It doesn't matter how greedy you are, you can't have a property bubble without fractional reserve banking.

We've had bubbles of all sorts for the last 500 years or so. All bubbles are based on greed and mass hysteria.

Andy

[pilchardthecat]

zakelwe said:

pilchardthecat said:

NoelWatson said:

pilchardthecat said:

"until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Is that because their parents got greedy and got swept up in the property bubble, hoping for instand riches, overleveraged, an blew up? Or have I got the wrong parents?

It doesn't matter how greedy you are, you can't have a property bubble without fractional reserve banking.

We've had bubbles of all sorts for the last 500 years or so. All bubbles are based on greed and mass hysteria.

Andy

Of course, but all have been limited by constraints on money supply which no longer exist. In 1637 you couldn't buy tulips if you didn't have the gold, and you couldn't borrow the gold from the bank if they didn't have it. Now commercial banks can create our fantasy fiat currency from thin air in the form of debt.

[zakelwe]

pilchardthecat said:

zakelwe said:

pilchardthecat said:

NoelWatson said:

pilchardthecat said:

"until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Is that because their parents got greedy and got swept up in the property bubble, hoping for instand riches, overleveraged, an blew up? Or have I got the wrong parents?

It doesn't matter how greedy you are, you can't have a property bubble without fractional reserve banking.

We've had bubbles of all sorts for the last 500 years or so. All bubbles are based on greed and mass hysteria.

Andy

Of course, but all have been limited by constraints on money supply which no longer exist. In 1637 you couldn't buy tulips if you didn't have the gold, and you couldn't borrow the gold from the bank if they didn't have it. Now commercial banks can create our fantasy fiat currency from thin air in the form of debt.

Not true, in the past there was even a bubble based on printing paper money, which they had to do more and more of to keep ahead of it. Of course it failed.

Andy

[pilchardthecat]

zakelwe said:

pilchardthecat said:

zakelwe said:

pilchardthecat said:

NoelWatson said:

pilchardthecat said:

"until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Is that because their parents got greedy and got swept up in the property bubble, hoping for instand riches, overleveraged, an blew up? Or have I got the wrong parents?

It doesn't matter how greedy you are, you can't have a property bubble without fractional reserve banking.

We've had bubbles of all sorts for the last 500 years or so. All bubbles are based on greed and mass hysteria.

Andy

Of course, but all have been limited by constraints on money supply which no longer exist. In 1637 you couldn't buy tulips if you didn't have the gold, and you couldn't borrow the gold from the bank if they didn't have it. Now commercial banks can create our fantasy fiat currency from thin air in the form of debt.

Not true, in the past there was even a bubble based on printing paper money, which they had to do more and more of to keep ahead of it. Of course it failed.

Andy

A bubble can't be any bigger than the money supply.

[zakelwe]

pilchardthecat said:

zakelwe said:

pilchardthecat said:

zakelwe said:

pilchardthecat said:

NoelWatson said:

pilchardthecat said:

"until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Is that because their parents got greedy and got swept up in the property bubble, hoping for instand riches, overleveraged, an blew up? Or have I got the wrong parents?

It doesn't matter how greedy you are, you can't have a property bubble without fractional reserve banking.

We've had bubbles of all sorts for the last 500 years or so. All bubbles are based on greed and mass hysteria.

Andy

Of course, but all have been limited by constraints on money supply which no longer exist. In 1637 you couldn't buy tulips if you didn't have the gold, and you couldn't borrow the gold from the bank if they didn't have it. Now commercial banks can create our fantasy fiat currency from thin air in the form of debt.

Not true, in the past there was even a bubble based on printing paper money, which they had to do more and more of to keep ahead of it. Of course it failed.

Andy

A bubble can't be any bigger than the money supply.

But when the monetary supply is being increased just to fund the bubble you end up with similar to what happened now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippi_Scheme

In this example the bank couldn't cover the lending for the bubble because they did not have enough actual money. Which is exactly the same that has happened this time!

Andy

[pilchardthecat]

zakelwe said:

pilchardthecat said:

zakelwe said:

pilchardthecat said:

zakelwe said:

pilchardthecat said:

NoelWatson said:

pilchardthecat said:

"until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Is that because their parents got greedy and got swept up in the property bubble, hoping for instand riches, overleveraged, an blew up? Or have I got the wrong parents?

It doesn't matter how greedy you are, you can't have a property bubble without fractional reserve banking.

We've had bubbles of all sorts for the last 500 years or so. All bubbles are based on greed and mass hysteria.

Andy

Of course, but all have been limited by constraints on money supply which no longer exist. In 1637 you couldn't buy tulips if you didn't have the gold, and you couldn't borrow the gold from the bank if they didn't have it. Now commercial banks can create our fantasy fiat currency from thin air in the form of debt.

Not true, in the past there was even a bubble based on printing paper money, which they had to do more and more of to keep ahead of it. Of course it failed.

Andy

A bubble can't be any bigger than the money supply.

But when the monetary supply is being increased just to fund the bubble you end up with similar to what happened now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippi_Scheme

In this example the bank couldn't cover the lending for the bubble because they did not have enough actual money. Which is exactly the same that has happened this time!

Andy

"the number of paper notes being issued by the Banque Royale were not equal to the amount of metal coinage it held"

Therefore it's a fiat currency and not one with any intrinsic value - Banque Royale are doing fractional reserve banking. Your example proves my point perfectly.

[zakelwe]

You said it couldn't happen in the past, I said it could and showed by that example. Which you now agree with it seems.

There have also been examples where bubbles have happened in the past without banking assistance, as you pointed out with the Tulips.

So a bubble does not need banking, that can just inflate the underlying cause which is greed.

Andy

[pilchardthecat]

zakelwe said:

You said it couldn't happen in the past, I said it could and showed by that example. Which you now agree with it seems.

There have also been examples where bubbles have happened in the past without banking assistance, as you pointed out with the Tulips.

So a bubble does not need banking, that can just inflate the underlying cause which is greed.

Andy

No, i said "It doesn't matter how greedy you are, you can't have a property bubble without fractional reserve banking."

I then used the example of the Tulip bubble in the 1630s to illustrate how it was constrained by the money supply in a way thet the current property bubble wasn't.

You then referred to a historic case of fractional reserve banking, where again the bubble was unconstrained because the bank had control of the money supply.

[zakelwe]

pilchardthecat said:

zakelwe said:

You said it couldn't happen in the past, I said it could and showed by that example. Which you now agree with it seems.

There have also been examples where bubbles have happened in the past without banking assistance, as you pointed out with the Tulips.

So a bubble does not need banking, that can just inflate the underlying cause which is greed.

Andy

No, i said "It doesn't matter how greedy you are, you can't have a property bubble without fractional reserve banking."

I then used the example of the Tulip bubble in the 1630s to illustrate how it was constrained by the money supply in a way thet the current property bubble wasn't.

You then referred to a historic case of fractional reserve banking, where again the bubble was unconstrained because the bank had control of the money supply.

Firstly you did say it didn't happen in the past, to quote you

"Of course, but all have been limited by constraints on money supply which no longer exist."

That is a clear statement and is wrong because you didn't know about the historical example I presented.

Secondly you are starting to contradict yourself.

You say in one sentence you can't have a bubble without banking assistance and then in the next you show an example where a bubble happened without banking assistance. Unless there is a difference between a property bubble and any other in your view.

Andy

[NoelWatson]

crankedup said:

NoelWatson said:

crankedup said:

NoelWatson said:

crankedup said:

Its difficult to find any organisation which are supporting this Governments monetary policies. Still they must be correct and on the right track if the Tories say so

Labour and the World Banks got us into this mess and I can't see the current Government getting us out of it TBH.

crankedup said:

Its difficult to find any organisation which are supporting this Governments monetary policies

Who is against it?

crankedup said:

Still they must be correct and on the right track

Agreed, and out credit rating reflects that

crankedup said:

Labour and the World Banks got us into this mess

Also bankers and consumers

crankedup said:

and I can't see the current Government getting us out of it TBH

It won't happen overnight, but then we had a decade long binge, so that is to be expected

As the old saying goes 'the proof of the pudding will be in the bleating'.

Who is bleating?

We have to wait and see, hence my use of words "will be'.

Fair enough - here is your first lot

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1350359/40...

[Sticks.]

NoelWatson said:

Fair enough - here is your first lot

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1350359/40...

So, if I read this correctly, under the last gov in the two years to 2010, 94% of claims to Incap Ben were rejected. Does that not imply little room for improvement/saving? Considering the effort involved, is that going to be cost-effective?

[pilchardthecat]

zakelwe said:

pilchardthecat said:

zakelwe said:

You said it couldn't happen in the past, I said it could and showed by that example. Which you now agree with it seems.

There have also been examples where bubbles have happened in the past without banking assistance, as you pointed out with the Tulips.

So a bubble does not need banking, that can just inflate the underlying cause which is greed.

Andy

No, i said "It doesn't matter how greedy you are, you can't have a property bubble without fractional reserve banking."

I then used the example of the Tulip bubble in the 1630s to illustrate how it was constrained by the money supply in a way thet the current property bubble wasn't.

You then referred to a historic case of fractional reserve banking, where again the bubble was unconstrained because the bank had control of the money supply.

Firstly you did say it didn't happen in the past, to quote you

"Of course, but all have been limited by constraints on money supply which no longer exist."

That is a clear statement and is wrong because you didn't know about the historical example I presented.

Secondly you are starting to contradict yourself.

You say in one sentence you can't have a bubble without banking assistance and then in the next you show an example where a bubble happened without banking assistance. Unless there is a difference between a property bubble and any other in your view.

Andy

Your historical example is a tiny edge-case. All the major world currencies were tied to the value of precious metals until quite recently.

Obviously the individuals are driven by greed, but the extent to which that greed can be sated has increased enormously since the introduction of fiat currencies. The size of a bubble is constrained only by the money supply, which itself is controlled (via the fractional reserve system and new debt) by commercial banks. The amount of new money (debt) they create is the only thing that can influence the size of the bubble, whether it occurs at all, and when it bursts.

[pacman1]

Boy, am I ever glad we've still got our gold reserves. Oh wait..

[crankedup]

Zod said:

KENZ said:

That period figures should have been the highest for the year. Weather would'nt have been a huge factor. I can see a double dip on the horizon if this goverment stays it's course and we've not had the public sector cuts yet!!!

Exactly the same thing happened last year with the snow and the recovery came in the next month.

If you think that Ed Balls' prescription would improve things, you are an extreme optimist. He prescribes an increase in the country's already outrageous debt. This, he claims to believe, will stimulate growth which will produce a greater increase in tax revenues than the extra debt interest we will have to pay, thus reducing the deficit (the gap between the nation's revenues and it's expenditure) more quickly than the Government's plan which is to reduce the debt and thus the interest payable.

It would be ludicrous even if Labour would spend the extra raised from the increased debt on real investment in the private sector (which pays for everything), but Labour would instead "invest" the money in the public sector. As we know from the thirteen years of profligacy, this "investment" would be spent largely on employing armies of client voters in non-jobs, on pointless "university" courses for illiterate and innumerate youth and other pet Labour projects.

I agree with Kenz, we need growth as a platform to start lifting us out from the debt, without growth we are stuffed. The Government are STILL very quite and do not seem to have a policy for growth, which is something most of us should be concerned about I would have thought. When the question of growth was raised during P.M. Questions today the Chancellor seemed to turn pink and look at his knob.

[crankedup]

spikeyhead said:

uk_vette said:

So what to do with the lump of savings in the bank?
I dont want to buy a house, as I believe the general house prices will still drop further during this 2011.
Move cash to another country that is offering far better interest rates?
China ?

'vette

I'm buying an Atom. Anyone think it's the wrong thing to do?

Just make sure you have a decent set of thermal underwear, its some months before the warm weather yet. Other than that, great fun car!

[crankedup]

johnfm said:

crankedup said:

Its difficult to find any organisation which are supporting this Governments monetary policies. Still they must be correct and on the right track if the Tories say so

Labour and the World Banks got us into this mess and I can't see the current Government getting us out of it TBH.

Are you posting rubbish again?

Economic momentum is such that policy changes take 18-24 months to be reflect in GDP figures. This is still a result of Labour economic policy.

You must lie under a duvet every day pretending nothing the Tories do is wrong - tt. And what an incredibly stupid thing to say, we had positive growth numbers throughout until this lots policies have started to kick in, and now its zero growth, being kind about the weather affect. I should stay under your duvet mate its a harsh world out here

[crankedup]

NoelWatson said:

crankedup said:

NoelWatson said:

crankedup said:

NoelWatson said:

crankedup said:

Its difficult to find any organisation which are supporting this Governments monetary policies. Still they must be correct and on the right track if the Tories say so

Labour and the World Banks got us into this mess and I can't see the current Government getting us out of it TBH.

crankedup said:

Its difficult to find any organisation which are supporting this Governments monetary policies

Who is against it?

crankedup said:

Still they must be correct and on the right track

Agreed, and out credit rating reflects that

crankedup said:

Labour and the World Banks got us into this mess

Also bankers and consumers

crankedup said:

and I can't see the current Government getting us out of it TBH

It won't happen overnight, but then we had a decade long binge, so that is to be expected

As the old saying goes 'the proof of the pudding will be in the bleating'.

Who is bleating?

We have to wait and see, hence my use of words "will be'.

Fair enough - here is your first lot

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1350359/40...

What! read a link into the Daily Wail, your kidding right. Its a rag full of ste at the best of times full of rubbish and sensationalism. Mind you they say the ladies enjoy the paper apparently.

[SplatSpeed]

crankedup said:

NoelWatson said:

crankedup said:

NoelWatson said:

crankedup said:

NoelWatson said:

crankedup said:

Its difficult to find any organisation which are supporting this Governments monetary policies. Still they must be correct and on the right track if the Tories say so

Labour and the World Banks got us into this mess and I can't see the current Government getting us out of it TBH.

crankedup said:

Its difficult to find any organisation which are supporting this Governments monetary policies

Who is against it?

crankedup said:

Still they must be correct and on the right track

Agreed, and out credit rating reflects that

crankedup said:

Labour and the World Banks got us into this mess

Also bankers and consumers

crankedup said:

and I can't see the current Government getting us out of it TBH

It won't happen overnight, but then we had a decade long binge, so that is to be expected

As the old saying goes 'the proof of the pudding will be in the bleating'.

Who is bleating?

We have to wait and see, hence my use of words "will be'.

Fair enough - here is your first lot

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1350359/40...

What! read a link into the Daily Wail, your kidding right. Its a rag full of ste at the best of times full of rubbish and sensationalism. Mind you they say the ladies enjoy the paper apparently.

what you scared of?