Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Moo

  1. Much the same position here. There are things in life that are worth going "all in" for, and the prospect of doing so in order to move from a very pleasent semi in a genuinely very nice area to the absolute **** end of the freehold market in a considerably less pleasent area whilst at the same time increasing monthly costs noticeable really, really isn't one of them.
  2. I think I'll plump for very mildly negative. Something like -0.2 percent.
  3. Personally I'd do away with big "headline" composite indices, as these are pretty meaningless, and instead go for a series of smaller indices to measure changes in cost of living essentials and almost-essentials excluding housing (food, water, power, transport, mandatory indirect taxation), net pay (as if, after tax), non-essentials (home entertainment systems, holidays, injection-moulded plastic dogplops, etc.), and housing itself. To my mind, a major part of the reason we're in the mess we are at the moment is because inflation levels in different types of "stuff" have, over the last ten or so years, been all over the place, and have yet the dozy headline figures used have completely failed to pick this up. In terms of policy, if you could get all those indices going along together as smoothly as possible, you'd have a pretty well balanced system. Okay, it wouldn't be easy, and it would require a much more sophisticated approach than the Big Interest Rate Lever, but I suspect it would be well worth a try. If a single inflation rate is needed, then it's probably easiest to just think of a number and say it's that every month, as it would arguably be no less meaningful than the current system.
  4. Your attachment is working just fine. I was just being a little sarky regarding the last couple of month's figures of "zero, zilch, not a sausage, no new money".
  5. Any chance you could post the panel of experts?
  6. Out of interest, how much are said houses going for at the moment, and what is classed as a "good area"? Just asking because said statement can be classed as perfectly reasonable or outrageous fantasy depending on where you're looking to buy.
  7. If this takes off, it's pretty high order bear food, especially if they're priced to achieve high occupancy quickly. I seriously wouldn't want to be a leveraged BLTer competing with Aviva and friends.
  8. And her mother was completely wrong. Some people bring up a family on that salary plus considerable state benefits. They don't do it on the salary alone. (That said, yeah, she's clearly pissing a lot of money up the wall)
  9. I've just crapped my pants in sheer terror, and I don't even have said product!
  10. I agree on their accuracy relative to some of the other indices. They are, however, a bit of a historical document by comparison. My guess is we'll see the LR figures rise for a few months now as they start to reflect with Nationwide and Halifax were showing a few months back.
  11. If by that you mean "When will Daddy Bear rename himself to Daddy Bull?", I honestly have no idea.
  12. With the new halls project abandoned, where are all those students going to live?
  13. To be fair, there are a few out there (well, there's one at least, and no it's not me) who's ended up with an unmanageable CC bill despite some pretty damn frugal living. That said, on the whole I think you're right there, especially when it comes to the really big borrowers. Yes, I can quite see how someone on a very tight budget could end up with a few hundred quid on there thanks to a load of badly timed life events (puncture, washing machine dies, etc.), but to run up the larger bills takes serious effort.
  14. Ah, yes, a nice historic article there quoting one of the many associate bodies of the National Institute For Pressing The Equal Button A Lot.
  15. My money would be on a jump to the left, with no chance of either a step to the right or simply hands on hips. If you think back to 1997, the whole point of New Labour was it gave them a chance to say "We're just like the Tories, only much more competent, and a lot more cuddly". It was a pretty easy sell for them at the time because the Tories were in a hell of a mess. Looking at Labour now, from opposition they're simply not going to be able to sell themselves with the "we're really good and they're shit" message because of the large amount of recent evidence to the contrary. In my opinion, Labour's only real chance post-election is to dis-associate themselves with "New" Labour, fess up to their previous leader's mistakes, and start looking properly Lefty again. That way they'll have a clear ideological difference with the Tories* that's easy to sell to their core vote. * Yes, there's a bit of a difference there now with regards to "unlimited-borrow-and-spend", but that's a particularly easy one to get over to the public.
  16. It strikes me as a perfectly reasonable list as long as he makes similar disclosures to you.
  17. Precisely. Remove the rest of the crap and the net result is "hotellier is £100 down". It demonstrates velocity and the multiplier effect of spending rather well, but has bugger all to do with the current situation. To make it analagous to the current situation the tourist would have to return to the hotel and tell the hotellier that he doesn't want the room yet or doesn't want his £100 back yet although will, at some point in the future, be back to claim either the room or the £100, or a combination of both, whilst also demanding a note from the hotellier he can show to his to wife to prove where the £100 went so she doesn't beat him up with the Kenwood Chef bread making attachment for going £100 down for nothing.
  18. Hank reluctantly concludes his contact lense landed the other side of the bar.
  19. ...of which a good few are pensioners and children.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.