Cost of living squeeze in 2022
Discussion
Cobracc said:
Sway said:
tannhauser said:
Gweeds said:
Deep Thought said:
You seem to "wish for" plenty of things to happen.
Mainly seeing other people suffer by the looks of it.
If they're hard working and prudent, they've not been 'locked out' of the housing market.
As shown by owner-occupier rates.
Meanwhile, all the things you're calling for will hurt the poorest much more than those with BTL portfolios that you really hate.
Total b
ks.I know so many hard working young people under 35 who haven't a hope in hell of buying their own property!
The government could help correct the housing market but with the tories it would be like Turkeys voting for Christmas.
So I moved further away, as that was what was important to me. I've also previously posted up loads of affordable FTB homes with great employment and transport links.
Crikey, even in places like London, if we work on the basis that there's multiple generations who've lived there - then there's now options like secondary charges on parents' homes that are typically mortgage free and have benefitted from large price inflation to cover deposits, etc.
I've heard all the bulls
t about how difficult it is to buy your first home for years. Lots of friends still bh and moan at nearly 40. Yet they ignore those that have bought, often with lower household incomes, by people who've made different choices.Oh, and it's turkeys not voting for Christmas for any party - as the majority are owner-occupiers.
Cobracc said:
Total b
ks.I know so many hard working young people under 35 who haven't a hope in hell of buying their own property!
The government could help correct the housing market but with the tories it would be like Turkeys voting for Christmas.
Since we live longer, age of retirement is going up etc; peoples expectations do need to be recalibrated. Longer term, we need to have better regional opportunity - rather than concentrating people into London and SE where scarcity / demand is leading to property way outside affordability.
This is the only way. Crashing asset values or the housing market; when it's been the symptom of Monetary Expansion (to compensate for poor wage inflation), is simply a plain suicidal approach.
stongle said:
Boris is just the plonker team mascot in the Big Bird outfit. The lacky in No 11 ought to know better, and arguably is far more important to the UKs well being than whatever goes on in No.10.
If you have a ministerial office, you should have some technical competency, Boris is just there to keep the votes coming in (which is entirely a different discussion).
It might be government policy to do nothing, but that doesn't say much for the Chancellor who should know what to do, but can't influence the strategy. Being either incompetent or impotent is bad. He's definetly one or the other. You think he's impotent then.
You have previously claimed the BoE can't tighten without unknown effect, if that's true - then govt need to be even more careful on (BoE) finding the neutral rate and landing the inflationary beast - without whipsaws. There is absolutely zero credible argument that Central Banks can go this alone. This has been known since 2015, fiscal and monetary policy HAVE to move in coordination. If the govt or Rishi (take your pick) policy is to rollover and die, then; you are just supporting my (posted elsewhere) theory that all politicians are w
kers.Technical competency in ministerial office? Let's face it when has that ever been more important than blind loyalty to the great leader?
I previously claimed that the central banks are (probably rightly) wary of quantitative tightening because the effects of such are less well known than simply raising base rates. I did not blanket state they 'can't tighten' as per above and there is a difference between those 2 statements.
And sure I agree that the CBs can't go this alone as you have said before but that's neither here nor there because it's been obvious for years that they can't. It's all they have could do plug the gaps and with the ECB and BoE pretty much entirely funding the whole chunk of pandemic spending by various EU countries and the UK, they have more than done their bit. (even if I would add Bailey has completely missed the point about being an effective central banker being contradictory and unclear in his various communications)
My issue with some of what you've posted previously is that when you had stated there was no other choice than to implement the whole 'levelling up' thing, my point was exactly supporting your theory that all politicians are w
kers so it was la-la land to actually think that they would be actually able (even assuming they were interested over and above lip service) to implement anything that would truly reset in 'levelling up'.tannhauser said:
stongle said:
Crashing asset values or the housing market; when it's been the symptom of Monetary Expansion (to compensate for poor wage inflation), is simply a plain suicidal approach.
There is a reason that the banks got a bailout back in 2008, it was the lesser of two evils.
isaldiri said:
stongle said:
Boris is just the plonker team mascot in the Big Bird outfit. The lacky in No 11 ought to know better, and arguably is far more important to the UKs well being than whatever goes on in No.10.
If you have a ministerial office, you should have some technical competency, Boris is just there to keep the votes coming in (which is entirely a different discussion).
It might be government policy to do nothing, but that doesn't say much for the Chancellor who should know what to do, but can't influence the strategy. Being either incompetent or impotent is bad. He's definetly one or the other. You think he's impotent then.
You have previously claimed the BoE can't tighten without unknown effect, if that's true - then govt need to be even more careful on (BoE) finding the neutral rate and landing the inflationary beast - without whipsaws. There is absolutely zero credible argument that Central Banks can go this alone. This has been known since 2015, fiscal and monetary policy HAVE to move in coordination. If the govt or Rishi (take your pick) policy is to rollover and die, then; you are just supporting my (posted elsewhere) theory that all politicians are w
kers.As the lackey in no11 is there by express leave of big bird in no10... ultimately it's no10 that's responsible for the competency (or otherwise) of the chancellor.
Technical competency in ministerial office? Let's face it when has that ever been more important than blind loyalty to the great leader?
I previously claimed that the central banks are (probably rightly) wary of quantitative tightening because the effects of such are less well known than simply raising base rates. I did not blanket state they 'can't tighten' as per above and there is a difference between those 2 statements.
And sure I agree that the CBs can't go this alone as you have said before but that's neither here nor there because it's been obvious for years that they can't. It's all they have could do plug the gaps and with the ECB and BoE pretty much entirely funding the whole chunk of pandemic spending by various EU countries and the UK, they have more than done their bit. (even if I would add Bailey has completely missed the point about being an effective central banker being contradictory and unclear in his various communications)
My issue with some of what you've posted previously is that when you had stated there was no other choice than to implement the whole 'levelling up' thing, my point was exactly supporting your theory that all politicians are w
kers so it was la-la land to actually think that they would be actually able (even assuming they were interested over and above lip service) to implement anything that would truly reset in 'levelling up'.I don't see any other lever left to pull but the one marked 'QT'. Especially as a big underlying driver for inflation is the ever-increasing supply of money reated post 2008.
Although the chancellor has ultimate responsibility for the Covid splurge, this began when QE was the game every central bank wanted to play as the investment banks managed to convince them that they were 'too big to fail'.
I'm not surprised savers like Tannhauser and others who don't own assets are angry - the process of flooding the world with more and more money has robbed them to pay the asset holders, from the BTL landlords to the likes of Blackrock. It's just that their ire should be directed at the people who make the rules, not the people who are able to take advantage of them - don't hate the player, hate the game.
Mark Benson said:
isaldiri said:
stongle said:
Boris is just the plonker team mascot in the Big Bird outfit. The lacky in No 11 ought to know better, and arguably is far more important to the UKs well being than whatever goes on in No.10.
If you have a ministerial office, you should have some technical competency, Boris is just there to keep the votes coming in (which is entirely a different discussion).
It might be government policy to do nothing, but that doesn't say much for the Chancellor who should know what to do, but can't influence the strategy. Being either incompetent or impotent is bad. He's definetly one or the other. You think he's impotent then.
You have previously claimed the BoE can't tighten without unknown effect, if that's true - then govt need to be even more careful on (BoE) finding the neutral rate and landing the inflationary beast - without whipsaws. There is absolutely zero credible argument that Central Banks can go this alone. This has been known since 2015, fiscal and monetary policy HAVE to move in coordination. If the govt or Rishi (take your pick) policy is to rollover and die, then; you are just supporting my (posted elsewhere) theory that all politicians are w
kers.As the lackey in no11 is there by express leave of big bird in no10... ultimately it's no10 that's responsible for the competency (or otherwise) of the chancellor.
Technical competency in ministerial office? Let's face it when has that ever been more important than blind loyalty to the great leader?
I previously claimed that the central banks are (probably rightly) wary of quantitative tightening because the effects of such are less well known than simply raising base rates. I did not blanket state they 'can't tighten' as per above and there is a difference between those 2 statements.
And sure I agree that the CBs can't go this alone as you have said before but that's neither here nor there because it's been obvious for years that they can't. It's all they have could do plug the gaps and with the ECB and BoE pretty much entirely funding the whole chunk of pandemic spending by various EU countries and the UK, they have more than done their bit. (even if I would add Bailey has completely missed the point about being an effective central banker being contradictory and unclear in his various communications)
My issue with some of what you've posted previously is that when you had stated there was no other choice than to implement the whole 'levelling up' thing, my point was exactly supporting your theory that all politicians are w
kers so it was la-la land to actually think that they would be actually able (even assuming they were interested over and above lip service) to implement anything that would truly reset in 'levelling up'.Surely the only lever the BoE have left (assuming they're not going to crash the housing market, much to Tannhauser's dismay) is to reduce the money supply?
I don't see any other lever left to pull but the one marked 'QT'. Especially as a big underlying driver for inflation is the ever-increasing supply of money reated post 2008.
Although the chancellor has ultimate responsibility for the Covid splurge, this began when QE was the game every central bank wanted to play as the investment banks managed to convince them that they were 'too big to fail'.
I'm not surprised savers like Tannhauser and others who don't own assets are angry - the process of flooding the world with more and more money has robbed them to pay the asset holders, from the BTL landlords to the likes of Blackrock. It's just that their ire should be directed at the people who make the rules, not the people who are able to take advantage of them - don't hate the player, hate the game.
pghstochaj said:
tannhauser said:
stongle said:
Crashing asset values or the housing market; when it's been the symptom of Monetary Expansion (to compensate for poor wage inflation), is simply a plain suicidal approach.
And the collateral damage?
There is a reason that the banks got a bailout back in 2008, it was the lesser of two evils.
t now!!Mark Benson said:
Surely the only lever the BoE have left (assuming they're not going to crash the housing market, much to Tannhauser's dismay) is to reduce the money supply?
I don't see any other lever left to pull but the one marked 'QT'. Especially as a big underlying driver for inflation is the ever-increasing supply of money reated post 2008.
Although the chancellor has ultimate responsibility for the Covid splurge, this began when QE was the game every central bank wanted to play as the investment banks managed to convince them that they were 'too big to fail'.
I'm not surprised savers like Tannhauser and others who don't own assets are angry.
Armchair_Expert said:
nickfrog said:
I am retired but I was probably posting as much while working. Glad you found the time to post though
Oh really? Twenny ( Conrad ) didn't allude to that... he just said you were a nice guy and apparently we are cut from the same cloth...
tannhauser said:
Gecko1978 said:
Wages need to rise in some sort of legislative way not just minimum wage.
We’re at the point now where full time min wage is nearly £20k a year.
But crucially the grading difference has certainly not been increased along the way so now there are jobs that were always low £20k’s but seeing an unskilled toilet cleaner taking home nearly the same grates.
So daily walk and paper popped into Budgens to see reduced whole chickens 1.4kg each.
RRP £5.99
Reduced to clear price £1.64.
I bought 5 of them - we are having a big bbq needed 10 breasts and thighs etc. we’ve saved a lot.
Who said yesterday reduced to clear would vanish - no it will not.
RRP £5.99
Reduced to clear price £1.64.
I bought 5 of them - we are having a big bbq needed 10 breasts and thighs etc. we’ve saved a lot.
Who said yesterday reduced to clear would vanish - no it will not.
Welshbeef said:
tannhauser said:
Gecko1978 said:
Wages need to rise in some sort of legislative way not just minimum wage.
Min wage increase causes inflation.
We’re at the point now where full time min wage is nearly 20k a year.
But crucially the grading difference has certainly not been increased along the way so now there are jobs that were always low 20k’s but seeing an unskilled toilet cleaner taking home nearly the same grates.
Throttlebody said:
Equities taking another big hit today. Fears of recession, low growth and interest rate rises playing out across the world markets. Volatile.
How’s that pension pot of yours looking like? Less to draw down on and far more expensive goods to buy. You going to struggle?
Welshbeef said:
So daily walk and paper popped into Budgens to see reduced whole chickens 1.4kg each.
RRP 5.99
Reduced to clear price 1.64.
I bought 5 of them - we are having a big bbq needed 10 breasts and thighs etc. we’ve saved a lot.
Who said yesterday reduced to clear would vanish - no it will not.
Did ye aye?RRP 5.99
Reduced to clear price 1.64.
I bought 5 of them - we are having a big bbq needed 10 breasts and thighs etc. we’ve saved a lot.
Who said yesterday reduced to clear would vanish - no it will not.
tannhauser said:
Welshbeef said:
tannhauser said:
Gecko1978 said:
Wages need to rise in some sort of legislative way not just minimum wage.
Min wage increase causes inflation.
We’re at the point now where full time min wage is nearly 20k a year.
But crucially the grading difference has certainly not been increased along the way so now there are jobs that were always low 20k’s but seeing an unskilled toilet cleaner taking home nearly the same grates.
It was pumped up to remove all the working tax credits basically and to make people think they are wealthier but they are not. They don’t produce more they do the same work as before.
Keep pushing up min wage then robotic cleaners start coming in … then what does the cleaner do?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff