Tuesday, Jan 26, 2010
UK 0.1% growth or 13.6% contraction?
Greg Pytel: UK bogus growth?
Pytel recalculates 0.1% UK growth figure questioning the effect of quantitative easing of £200 billion. The government have a serious question to answer.
Posted by ant @ 11:09 AM (2079 views) Add Comment
30 Comments
- If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
- If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
1. icarus said...
Anyone seen ant and Greg Pytel together?
2. ant said...
I did :-)
3. icarus said...
Anyone else?
4. ant said...
Yeap, quite a few friends we have in common:-)
5. timmy t said...
Anyone seen Smugdog and Gordon Brown together?
6. little professor said...
ant posts every greg pytel blog article, it gets a bit irritating - if we wanted to subscribe to greg pytel's blog, we'd visit that page, not this news blog.
Anyway, back on topic - the anaemic 0.1% rise as opposed to the expected 0.4% (which was pathetic itself) just adds more evidence that the economy is still in dire straits, despite what the 50% surge in the FTSE over the last year would have you believe. The billions of quantative easing and record-low interest rates have only managed to achieve a paltry 0.1% rise.
Moreover the shocking inflation figures show that rather than fuelling economic growth, the newly printed money has just led to general inflation and an asset price bubble. The end of QE and the inevitable rise of interest rates later this year to combat inflation will pull the economy back into a sharp recession.
7. jack c said...
LP - your last paragraph mirrors my thoughts entirely - interesting to see if we are proved correct in the long run.
8. ant said...
@little professor and jack:
surprised? Because it's a pyramid collapse, my dear. I refer you to the blog of... let me not irritate you... you know whose;-) It's all there.
9. jack c said...
ant - I have read the various links over recent months and the get the general picture thanks
10. Crunchy said...
I hope I see Bush and Blair together for a very long time.
11. vacuouspolitician said...
Keep posting Ant...this is your site as well as the chosen few.
12. tpbeta said...
Stop posting Ant. Greg Pytel is not a news source. He's just a blogger with a (overly) high opinion of himself. I don't stuff my random thoughts down as news, no matter how clever I might think I am. Why do you insist on doing so on his behalf (if he is indeed a different person)?
Can't you put this stuff in the forum with everyone else's opinions? Some of use the news section as a useful news aggregator and this is just spam.
13. tpbeta said...
Stop posting Ant. Greg Pytel is not a news source. He's just a blogger with a (overly) high opinion of himself. I don't stuff my random thoughts down as news, no matter how clever I might think I am. Why do you insist on doing so on his behalf (if he is indeed a different person)?
Can't you put this stuff in the forum with everyone else's opinions? Some of use the news section as a useful news aggregator and this is just spam.
14. ant said...
@tpbeta: I am not positng Pytel's views 'cause I think he is always correct, but 'cause he raises important points and questions others do not. Did any "news source" raise a question of the effects of QE on GDP yesterday? (Mind you, Pytel only suggested its scale and asked experts to come up with their opinions.) For week and months "news sources" were coming up with their opinions (not news) what QE may or may not cause. Now when we have GDP results, no mainstream media (including "news sources") comment how much, if anything, of GDP is really effect of printing money. Maybe you are not interested in that, but I am and I think others also are. And I think it is important.
Even if your view that Pytel has "(overly) high opinion of himself" were correct, so what? Ironically, I think it would be justified. Possibly not because he is so brilliant, but as it appears "news sources" are,,,, well, not that brilliant.
15. tpbeta said...
Ant - it's not that his views are interesting or otherwise. I just find it irritating that they're continually posted in the wrong place. Why can't you put them in the forum where they properly belong. It suggests that you're trying to propagandise this point of view by giving it undue prominence. Occasionally to put a blogger in there might be OK, but to do so repeatedly and with the same blogger is very annoying to me.
16. ant said...
I hope you accept that posting Pytel's on the News blog (rather than Forum) is a matter of coverage. Like you are, I am annoyed by postings by others from mainstream media: BBC, Telegraph, Times, FT. Putting them on the blog is a proper spamming. It is happening every day, many times a day. Is anyone going to stop it? If you want to know them their web sites are well-known. So I hope you will argue for removing posts referring to opinions and analysis from these well-known websites.
You should have noted that the same commentators that could not have seen the glaring obvious (i.e. that this crisis was coming and was massive) are now considered source of information and analysis. Pathetic. On the merits, if you strip the extreme cases, and Pytel is not one of them, and blog rant element, there are far more competent articles on the blogs than in the mainstream press.
Pytel's analysis was good enough to be published by HoC Treasury Committee as evidence. Therefore I do not see a reason for discriminating Pytel against, for example, the FT. Especially that the latter's level of analysis is lamentable.
17. ant said...
tpbeta - note that FT, Telegraph, Economist, Times and so on, "propagadise" their views and are given undue high prominence sometimes even if they publish utter nonsense. They hold a grip on propaganda. News blogs are designed to break such monopoly not to enshrine it. I hope you will reflect on that.
18. tpbeta said...
The point is if everyone posts their own opinions on the newsblog then it becomes unusable. It exists to highlight what the MSM are saying, with commentary from members. Greg Pytel, without disrespect, is not MSM. He's a nobody - some kind of press officer at LSE if Google is to be believed. I've no idea what the HoC Treasury Committee publish. Maybe they publish all the submissions they receive. It doesn't mean much.
19. ant said...
...and who are journalists and analysts from the mainstream media many of whom write routinely loads of drivel that are then "propagandised" on Newsblogs? Half-baked historians, aspiring sociologists or anthropologist after career change? Claiming now to be learnt in finance. To be honest: I do not care. I judge article on their merits not WHO write them. It is rather disappointing that you are unable to do so.
20. tpbeta said...
It's fine to have a low opinion of the MSM, It's fine to judge on merit. But why repeatedly post the same blogger in an area meant for MSM articles? It just irritates people - well me anyway. To post a particularly interesting blog occasionally is fine. I've done it myself. But the sheer weight of absurd declaratory articles comes across as (self)-aggrandizing.
21. ant said...
@tpbeta: you wrote: "I've no idea what the HoC Treasury Committee publish. Maybe they publish all the submissions they receive. It doesn't mean much."
With respect, this sentence epitomises your intellect and, possibly, shows bias in your approach. In the first sentence you admit not to have an idea about HoC publishing criteria. Then you suggest that they publish everything. Then you use wide sweeping "it" to implicitly discredit the fact that Pytel's analysis was published by HoC, despite the fact to have admitted that you have no idea, which was a reasonable point to start. If you have no idea on a substantive point of an argument do not comment on it. Otherwise it comes across as not particular intelligent or honest and this puts in doubt the motivation of your critical comments.
On the substantive point: HoC Select Committee do not publish all the submissions they receive. I have checked that. They only publish submission which they consider serious and competent enough to be considered as evidence helpful with their work. So whilst this is not a conclusive argument on quality of Pytel's analysis, it shows that his views were accepted as serious on the highest level in the UK. Feel free to write an expert submission to any HoC Select Committee (like Pytel did). If published it will look great on your CV. Besides you seem to have failed to read endorsements on Pytel's blog.
I take Pytel's views as very interesting that seem to explain coherently the causes and mechanics of this crisis. I am disappointed that mainstream media are good in story telling but they are incapable of basic rigorous analysis. Whether Pytel's analysis is eventually accepted as correct is far from certain. But I will not be surprised if they will.
PS. Although this is immaterial to the above, Google is not the best source of information: for many reasons. Your statement "if Google is to be believed" is really from kids playground. Of course not without further credible checking. However, for some on a lower end of intellect pile, this may sound as rhetorical question giving credence to your views. This shows your overall approach.
22. tpbeta said...
I see your responses are degenerating into confused and low level abuse. Perhaps you should get back to your London University press releases.
23. ant said...
@tpbeta: I post repeatedly Pytel for three reasons:
1. For the same reasons as other repeatedly post other same sources of analysis: BBC, Telegraph, FT, and so on. I do not see any reason for discriminating Pytel. Regardless of his rant bits on the blog, I think he has more in-depth approach (whether he is right or wrong is another matter) than main stream journalist.
2. To make his approach more publicised to "force" other analysts start doing more detailed analysis on the current crisis. I do not advocate that Pytel is 100% correct. The sad thing is that the main stream analysts are unable to pick up on Pytel's points (even if he is wrong, as he may be).
3. I like his blog. I think he has the right balance of solid analysis and rant. (Although sometimes he is too longish in his writings.)
24. ant said...
@tpbeta: I have nothing to do with London University so you seem to be completely confused.
I do not accept I have abused you: I have simply pointed out weak points of your intellect. So if anything you indulged in "self-abuse".
PS. It is surprising that you are so touchy as you did not have a problem to call Pytel "just a blogger with a (overly) high opinion of himself" which was not particularly diplomatic.
25. tpbeta said...
Well I suppose it boils down to whether you're abusing the wishes of the community of this board by posting this material in what seems to me to be the wrong place and for the wrong reasons. If it's just me that finds it irritating, and I accept that might be true, then please feel free to disregard my criticisms.
26. ant said...
I agree. Thus far you seem to be the only one that voiced such a strong view. If you look at the number of the post I put, apart from yesterday (when they were two), there were not that many. To call it spamming is simply wrong. I also think that it balances mainstream media and other blog readers do not mind to be occasionally alerted.
Anyway if I get more views like yours I will take this very seriously. (At the same time I hope you be fair and do not start a campaign amongst your friends "get rid off Pytel from our blog".)
27. vacuouspolitician said...
This is typical of some of the people on this site. Have you never heard of freedom of speech?...this isn't a dictatorship where you tell people not to post something because it "irrates you".
...It's no wonder Jonathan Davis walked away from this site.
28. tpbeta said...
I assure you I won't be organising any 'Get Pytel' campaign, though the idea has a surreal charm.
29. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.
30. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.