Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

fluffy666

Members
  • Posts

    10,124
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by fluffy666

  1. I think it's accepted now by almost anyone, except the most blinkered of bulls, that House Prices are in a huge bubble.

    I was wondering what are the top 3 things that people on here personally experienced that made them realise the bubble was amongst us.

    (1) Property programs on TV exceeding 20% of screen time.

    (2) Rents being so far behind mortgage interest on the same property (Let along repayment mortgage..)

    (3) My wife suddenly getting interested in BTL..

  2. Or they could unplug from the grid and make their own power at home or locally which would be both environmental and service their needs. Centralised power systems are massively subsidised and anachronistic but provide the dependancy which all governments love.

    Unlike the centralised production of wind turbines and solar panels, of course. And when you start looking at the cost of backup systems (i.e batteries or similar), it gets expensive indeed to go it alone. If you live in any sort of high density housing it is impossible. Power grids are just a distribution network; you might as well railagainst roads and insist everyone have their own tractor..

    The government is absolutely desparate for this problem to be resolved, as high prices for energy (and even worse, blackouts) are not popular with the voters. I'm not sure why they should love this 'dependancy'.

  3. I seem to remember similar stories to this every winter over the last few years.

    This is because UK North Sea gas production is dropping something like 10-20% a year, and the pipelines and LNG terminals to replace this with gas from Norway and the middle east are being frantically built to try and replace it. It's been a neck-and-neck race over the past few years, but since we've had generally mild winters we have just scraped by.

    What generally happens in shotages is that Industrial customers get shut off first, which we don't tend to notice (Unless it's your employer..). Then electric power stations, then domestic supplies. We have been close to blackouts, but not yet..

    And yes, Nuclear is cool, or at least relatively cheap, reliable and non-polluting. Personal wind turbines less so..

  4. Maybe they want to do an Enron that found out that you can reduce output and recive a massive rise in income from a captive market.

    Just think what no power would do to the economy and by extension house prices. :lol:

    I'm waiting for a theory about peak water to come out for the UK and Brown is waiting for all the extra taxes on fuel but i don't know who will win first.

    The using up of North Sea gas to make electricity has got to be one of the most stupid decisions in British history.

    Hmmm.. Let's use a decade of cheap gas to bankrupt Nuclear and Coal electric generators, killing investment and anything non-Gas, then act all surprised when it runs out and we suddenly have a massive import dependance. At the same time, let's not build any meaningful storage facilities. What could possibly go wrong?

    We have three choices:

    (a) Build more coal fired plants

    (B) Build more Nuclear plants

    © Sit in the dark and freeze.

  5. I'm undecided. I can't decide between liking the idea of a trap leading to financial Darwinism - and disliking the deception in the first place.

    Can I enjoy Shadenfreunde at the greedy relative-rich who loose their assets, or must I consider the deceived relative-poor who were forced by legislation/circumstance to accept poor investment opportunities as their only option?

    $79 for LUNCH? Where do you take lunch - around here a sandwich is £1.99 - or $5 (roughly) :-)

    http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2201868,00.html

    Boss of Merryl Lynch lost $7.9 Billion (Yes, they have looked down the back of the sofa), so he may get a $159 million payoff.

    (That's some pretty cheap lunches, but he will be unemployed and have to scrimp a bit)

  6. £373m per day... erm - isn't that about £2,200 per capita per anm?

    What proportion of people in the UK are in debt at all?

    If we exclude children and OAPs - about 24m people - that makes the *average* debt of people of working age grows by ~£3,700 per year.

    That's quite a lot. If we say that 50% of people of working age are paying down debt - that means the average increase in debt per year for everyone else is £7,400... which is pretty damned significant given the average wage!

    If this is unsecured borrowing, then we're in a rather amusing situation!

    OAPs can still be in debt.. and I suspect that they add in Students who will be adding perhaps 10k+ a year.

    But it is perfectly possible to spend more than you earn for a very long time as long as personal loan rates are in single figures. You have to wonder just how many people are doing this to meet day-to-day expenses. After all, that figure (373m/day) probably represents most of the disposable income of the country.

  7. (1) Lots of people have, apparently, bought BTL property without even checking that the rent would cover the mortgage repayments.

    (2) Lots of people have, apparently, jacked up their mortgages simply in order to buy stuff like brand new cars and holidays.

    (3) Lots of people have, apparently, taken out interest only mortgages without thinking about repaying the capital.

    (4) Lots of lenders have lent cash to people purely because they claimed their income was a certain level.

    (5) Lots of lenders have subsequently bombarded the same people with offers of credit cards and loans.

    (6) This isn't going to end well, is it?

  8. The ratings agency response to this is that they were AAA when they were sold, and they did then have a default probability that was very low. However, there was no guarantee that the rating would not change (such as to junk grade) over the lifetime of the security. Hope this appeals to your SOH :-).

    Dosen't that make the whole ratings system completely worthless? 'This Bond is guaranteed not to default until it does/after this year's bonus round'?

    My SOH would be more appeased with heads on spikes.

    These asset-backed AAA's were thought a wonderful thing in the early 2000's, because they paid higher rates than standard AAA's. Now, sadly, we know why.

    No free lunch (Apart from if you manage to lose $7.9 billion, in which case you get a payoff enough for 100 million or so lunches).

  9. The financial system will collapse!

    The gold price will rise inexorably (with everything else) to the point where the few people who own meaningful amounts are granted oligarch status?

    We will all see sense and debate a return the beloved and trustworthy gold standard.

    The value of the endeavours of the remaining 6,000,0000,000 people on earth will be insignificant when compared to the value of small quantities of gold.

    Earths 6,000,000,000 population will bow down to the gold bugs and pass the gold system back onto the legislature books.

    And then a large metallic metorite will break up in Earth's atmosphere, raining several kilos of 10% gold alloy on everyone's back garden and causing immediate and massive devaluation of gold worldwide. The gold bugs will sob.

  10. CNN have some good ideas about putting the cost back squarely where it belongs...

    And a lot of these 'Masters Of The Universe' could perhaps hand back the bonuses that they clearly didn't earn by hard work or research.

    Personally, I think that if major banks are in serious risk of collapse or completely insolvent, they should not be given a bailout, they should be nationalised at zero recompense to shareholders. A huge problem with the financial system is the huge moral hazard created by repeated bailouts; the more reckless the behaviour the less likely that the consequences will come home.

    It may be time to examine the role of limited liability; if banks were olny allowed to be full-liability companies with shareholders on the hook for all losses in the event of a failure (Unlike limited liability, where shareholders can only lose their investment), you might see a bit more research on the part of shareholding institutions.

×
×
  • 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.