Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Moo

Members
  • Posts

    3,350
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Moo

  1. Personally, I think that's the attitude that'll keep securitisation from making any kind of meaningful comeback. Lack of transparency in the process by which a mortgage is deeded to "safe" is, I very strongly suspect, not going to play well with potential buyers of this stuff. Anyway, I'd love to see a decent case made for anything more than 4x single or 4x largest + 1x smallest joint being "long term affordable". I'd also like to see cat inflate "Hubba-Bubba" with it's ****, but I doubt that'll happen either.
  2. He's not lying. I must have saved a few hundred quid over the last ten or so years. Ooooh! *clutches the duvet in excitement*
  3. Translates as... "Oh ******! We'd better change our stance fast or we're going to look like a right bunch of plums. Someone make up another report, I'm off for lunch."
  4. I know the answer, I just have a rather pathetic desire to send to people of delving around the net for vote totals. The years since '92 have, in my opinion, been fascinating. In terms of Britain's political leaders and the events we've witnessed, the only way I can think of describing Labour's reign is "when no-one gives a ******, this is what happens".
  5. In "Who wants to be a Millionaire" style, arrange the following national vote totals in descending order... Conservatives under John Major in 1997. Conservatives under John Major in 1992. Labour under Tony Blair in 1997. Labour under Tony Blair in 2001. Labour under Tony Blair in 2005. Labour under Neil Kinnock in 1992. Conservatives under Margaret Thatcher in 1983. (Edit : Whoops, ta Destuctive Bob)
  6. Personally, I'd say we're looking at a rotated St. Germain Auxerrois pipe organ shaped recession. We are currently around the cherb on the left of the central figure. The central figure represents the next election. (Edit : Because there's no such thing as a 'pip organ')
  7. Shrink and Rafar... interesting posts. To play devils advocate somwhat, do you think it's possible that pre-cut planning is actually going on but kept well and truely secret? 'NHS cuts' is, for politicians, a close second on the 'Things We Don't Want To Come Out Before They Happen' list to 'World War III Starts on Wednesday Evening', so I would presume that any such planning would be kept as far away from anyone who'd leak it as possible. This counts doubly so for Labour at the moment, as it looks like they're positioning to fight the next election based on continued spending. For what it's worth, I'm not standing up for your management at all (by the sound of it, they actually are a bit shit), merely considering how I'd try and play it if I were the one passing on news of reduced budgets to trust managers - "If the unions get a whiff of this before the General Election, you're out of here".
  8. Any chance of some figures from the 70s?
  9. Chuck in a likely change of government in less than a years time, going from governance on a 9 month timescale by bods with a propensity to spend to one with potentially a 20 year timescale by bods who're likely to be a lot more prudent, and I think you'll have even less trouble disbelieving the inflation story.
  10. Go and work out the repayments on a 25 year term £160k repayment mortgage at 5%, 10%, 15% and 20% interest rates. Now compare them to the takehome of someone on £40k (about £2,500). Quite simply, at 10% both BTL'ers and FTB'ers would completely cease to exist at that rate. No new money in. End of. At 20% it's total Armageddon. Yeah, I know I've not added in the pay rises, but given that they lag, they're not guaranteed, and all other living costs are rising anyway, they're basically pissing in the wind compared to the increase in repayments in the short term. Why is this different to the 70s? Income multiples. Do the same calculations, but change that 4x income £160k repayment mortgage for a £120k repayment mortgage and the difference is quite staggering. In short, inflation is a great way of destroying debt.... but only if the amount of debt isn't far too high in the first place.
  11. Ask your parents what their income multiple was
  12. Great idea if everyone else is on a ten year tracker as well.
  13. If you want to do it, and you can afford it now, and you're sure you'll continue to afford it, do it. If not, don't. However, before you decide whether you can afford it, please go read around the subject for a bit, then work out your living costs from your old bank statements, not from what you think you live on. Then again, that's what I'd have said at the peak as well.
  14. Not sure about that. Just as inflation expectations play a part in people's behaviour, so do public spending expectations. Make no mistake, even small cuts could be extremely painful not only for the public sector, but for public sector dependant private firms (and there's a lot of them), so this sort of stuff can have an effect on decisions made now regardless of what actually lies ahead. Furthermore, on it's own an article like this has little impact, but in a situation where the debate is essentially "there will be savings made, we just don't know how big and where", as opposed to be "will there be savings?", it's actually quite a hard-hitter. Or to put it another way, there'll be a lot of directors out there reading that (and similar articles) wondering if their business model will still be intact in an era of focusing on the real essentials - Mrs. Smith will still be teaching English to the Sixth Form, but will Mr. Jones still be selling (and installing, and providing training, and providing maintenance...) his interactive whiteboards to Mrs. Smith's boss? Fred's still going to be working out what to do with Somethingshire's household waste, but will Jenny and Co. still be paryting on the money from designing, printing, and distributing the quaterly newsletter to tell the people of Somethingshire they're saving the earth by keeping green and brown glass separate? Derek's still going to be keeping a track on state of the roads on his patch, but will he be telling Dave and his crew of road menders to fix quite so many?
  15. Oh, absolutely. However, given the extremely variable quality of open source software over the years, it would be a brave man who'd claim there's an additional level of magic to the whole community dev system that eliminates that risk. I completely agree when it comes to generic, free-to-use stuff. The whole open source dev community system can work very well under those conditions, partly because the numbers required are available, and partly because all the additional non-source information required is available. The problem here is full openness is, in many cases, never going to be possible. There'll be business logic in there that clients may well be extremely reluctant to allow into the public domain (e.g. "Hey, here's exactly how our pricing works"), and the chances of getting real test data are, for the most part, precisely zero. In short, open source is one thing, open company is something entirely different.
  16. That's very much a "says it all really" graph. To put that into context, the defence budget for this year is £35bn, so the peak to current low change is roughly the equivalent of twice the budget required maintain a credible nuclear deterant, fight two overseas conflicts, and still carry out the military's peacetime tasks. That's a lot of money.
  17. Which is fine when you're talking about generic stuff, but rather falls on it's **** when it comes to bespoke stuff. The gubbins I'm working on at the moment would never make it into existance if it was free (in either sense), as it's just far too task-specific. Or to put it another way, it's one thing to offer a 'free' operating system, and quite something else to offer, say, free control and monitoring software for milking parlours.
  18. We're talking total approvals here though, not net lending. Unless my memory's gone totally to ratshit (always a possible, that), net lending's down to 2001 levels, which means regardless of the number of approvals the lenders as a whole are back to pre-securitisation levels of lending.
  19. Which, unless you're actually holding land bought during the bubble, is not necessarily a bad thing. What construction needs is access to cheap building land a plenty of demand at a price they can build on said land at a profit at. High house prices per se are not especially 'good'.
  20. It's not so much the lenders remaining as where they get/got their funds from. The Happy Magic Freebie Money tap is, in fact, arguably more turned off for the remaining private sector banks than it is for the state supported \ owned ones.
  21. "Pension? No Mr. Bond, I expect me to die" In all honesty, that's pretty much the plan. Horribly pessimistic I know, but I fully expect to peg out in my 60s anyway, so I honestly don't care either way.
  22. In order for that to happen, we'd need to see a lot of repos, and under such conditions all the market fiddling in the world wouldn't hold prices up.
×
×
  • 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.