Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Mikhail Liebenstein

Members
  • Posts

    12,910
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Mikhail Liebenstein

  1. So it is the Mail, and they report it with a bit of a positive spin and say the ONS uprated a fall cast fall in 2022 to now be a rise.


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/markets/article-10137681/House-prices-rise-13-cent-five-years.html

    But based on how I see this with inflation, doesn't it seem more like a fall in real values? That said this year's rise will be 8.6%, so may house prices are now literally behaving like other speculative assets.

  2. On 25/10/2021 at 15:33, MancTom said:

    re: terraces/semis you need to check out the neighbours carefully. In my experience noise is not unusual:

     

    20 hours ago, PeanutButter said:

    The mums can be vicious

     

    What you don't want to do is move next to a mumsnet couple with fertility issues.

    I'm sure mumsnet has a fertility thread, but not one for the neighbours.

  3. 1 hour ago, MonsieurCopperCrutch said:

    The state of these anti-vax covidiots mocking a child:

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/anti-vaxxers-school-meeting-immunocompromised-b1945555.html

    Anti-vaxx parents mock immunocompromised child speaking at school meeting

     

    Sorry, but the immunocompromised have no right telling normal people how to live. Disease is part of nature, you can't avoid it, and if you can't survive it then that's nature.

    This is nothing to do with medicine, preventing the healthy from living their lives is clearly a 21st Century First World Solution to the Problem.

  4. 7 hours ago, anonguest said:

    "The government are keeping a lot about the side effects under wraps and that's what we're annoyed about."

    .......

    It's this aspect of the whole pandemic that sickens me. And before any of the regulars, or anyone else, rush to put fingers to keyboards to remind me about all the elderly, etc blah blah blah. Save your strength. I really don't give a sh*t.

    I'm with you on that.

    I've said all along I'd rather see 100,000 over 70s die of C19 that sacrifice one younger person's life. 

  5. 13 minutes ago, subsidiser said:

    Didn't the Lancet come out with an article saying Sputnik V was no good?

    Later they published something saying it was actually at least as effective as other vaccines. Nevertheless no one will recognize it in the West.

    This particular anti vaccine propaganda originated in the West (specifically the Lancet).

    Well Sputnik V is very similar to AZ, though in the UK the vulnerable and a good chunk of the over 50s got Pfizer. My guess is there isn't too much wrong with the vaccines, just the people they have been given to. 

    Expecting a good immune response from a geriatric with 5 comorbidities and a dodgy immune system is like asking Roy Chubby Brown to beat Usain Bolt's 100m record. 

  6. 22 minutes ago, Locke said:

     

    And interestingly I've been vaccinated, but suspect I had C19 exposure back in November 2019 when 2 industry colleagues got pneumonia whilst on a US trip mixing with folk from Wuhan. 

    I'm now starting to wonder if C19 gave immunity to the vaccine? 

  7. 1 minute ago, Tiger131 said:

    Looking after old and sick people may be lucrative for the healthcare industry and health workers but it doesn't create any wealth, it just redistributes it.

     

    Indeed, which is why the best investment is exercise and good food. 

    I'm currently on holiday, but still make time to do at least 40 minutes of exercise each day, on top of all the walking etc. 

  8. 47 minutes ago, GeneCernan said:

    Are we now going to live our lives at the mercy of various restrictions to lower the chances of old people catching COVID and dying? 

    Again, largely what I've said all along.

    The problem has been massive overreaction based on TikTok videos from China and speculation of a lab leak.

    The fact is it is just a Coronavirus, may be the novelty counted for a while when it was the α variant, though a death rate of 0.4% is hardly catastrophic. 

    My view is that this is down to demographics and a global boomer glut.

    Rather than risk death from what is actually a cold; and given they'd like to spend their HPI/final salary pension on cruises etc, plus the fact  many don't have to work to get money - they were are happy for everyone to be locked down , not realising their HPI and pensions are all backed /propped up by the real economy.

    In summary whole thing is an overreaction and even the worried boomers in their mid 50s to mid 60 probably didn't  need to worry much.

  9. 1 hour ago, markyh said:

    Good, we need to learn to live with this thing without lockdowns and face nappies. I would like to see stats of the recent demographics of who is being hospitalised, age ,race , jabbed , unjabbed, co-morbidities etc, and the same for deaths, i want to know who is getting sick and dying.

    Every person i hear about dying recently on the radio sounds like they were so unwell generally a cut on the knee would finish them off. 

    That's been my view all along. 

    Seems to be the sort who need to carry around oxygen tanks mostly dropping dead. May be we should also ban walking upstairs. 

  10. 6 hours ago, Clarky Cat said:

     

    If you take the 40-49 age group, those figures give a case fatality rate of 0.28% in the unvaccinated and 0.085% in the vaccinated, with risks of hospital admissions of 2.7% and 0.31% respectively.  In the 50-59 age group the CFR is 2.0% versus 0.14% and the admission risk is 5.3 against 1.4%.

    Of course those statistics are also pretty meaningless and affected by similar factors. 

     

     

    It's not just the age though, it is the comorbidities. They really should be expressing the hospitalisations and CFR by age as numbers from a set of healthly individuals, putting  the unhealthy in the same bucket is just a way of making the numbers look worse than they area.

  11. Here is a potential solution to the broader crisis from the OECD: 

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/10/19/britons-must-work-longer-avoid-debt-crisis-oecd-warns/

    BTW, I read something today (need the link) saying in the 1970s the average ratio of workers to pensions was 4.2 :1 1 (i.e 20%), but this rose closer to 3.3:1 today (30% odd retired) and will reach 2.3:1 by 2050.

    I did find this chart which makes the same historic point.

    https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/SPPOPDPNDOLGBR

×
×
  • 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.