Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Growlers2

  • Rank
    HPC Poster

Recent Profile Visitors

708 profile views
  1. How can it be over priced if it is yielding greater than the cost of credit? That's my point. Any price falls will lead to increased yields and thus stability in prices is likely.
  2. You missed the most significant thing from the above - the fact that interest rates are so low Ignore the SVRs, OOs and LLs can borrow at under 2% at 75Pc LTV. That's nuts and I'd have to agree with the conclusions of another poster (can't remember name) that rental yields are higher than this across the country. Why would you sell an asset yielding 4pc for example if you are able to borrow at these rates? It's not about availability of credit imho it's about rental yield Vs cost of borrowing. The lack of products in the 85pc bracket is immaterial in my opinion.
  3. Right, so I get this right, this guy - https://profile.theguardian.com/user/id/17623718/replies?page=1 -is the Ex PWC partner who is confusing GAAP with tax policy? Is that right? Crouch's quote references an EX PWC partner being among the 118 crew gernally but I couldn't see a quote there. I'm just speaking for myself, the difference between taxation principles and GAAP accounting would not be obvious to me without having done my accountancy training. It seems a reasonable point to make to me i.e. the "guy" in question (Home Provider) didn't appreciate the distinction and that the mis
  4. Surely you are splitting hairs here! Some guy said "GAAP" rather than "principles of taxation" so what, many people don't have an accountancy background (or and expensive education). The fact is that the tax system does (or used to) be alligned to the concept of economic surplus or profit i.e. if you tax this "bit" then people carry on their economic activity without disruption and there is limited impact on overall output. To this extent the confusion between accounting profit and tax charged is understandable because the BTL tax changes (as you note on the Bootle Thread) obviously do no
  5. Unfortunately, i don't think this is representative of Croydon. Was this for a room or a property? If room i agree rents have been static for years. However the rent for properties have clearly gone up. I considered renting a flat (one bed near the center) in the back end of 2010 and rent was £650pcm. It was a nicish place too. Have a Google on right move and i'd bet you can't get a studio for that now (I've not checked in months). The unfortunate fact is, is my opinion, that rents in Croydon are up c. 30% on 2010. That would be my best guess.
  6. Anyone been to Wye before? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wye,_Kent Seems like a nice village near Canterbury and Ashford.
  7. Thanks for providing those. I found MMT insight on money really interesting - I don't think I viewed money in those terms before. I can see how this approach to viewing the economy is anti homocentric - it seems to ignore individuals and focusing just on the plumbing [Perhaps this is the approaches major failure / weak point - i.e. to exclude people from a social science]. I'm still finding the contours of area but it is interesting. I think most people know that the monetary system is fiat / credit based but I think most assume (myself included) that the natural result of this arrangement wo
  8. Scepticus, I'm keen to understand your NIRP views in more detail and will read your past posts on the subject. A question that came to mind was - how do you categorise / define you economic philosophy? In terms of the schools of thought - Keynsian, monetarist, marxist, Austrian, institutionalist.... etc. What is the underlying framework that you use? Furthermore, would you consider your view hetrodox to mainstream economist and academics? i.e. do you think that central bankers really subscribe to views similar to your own but are prevent from essentially being honest and this would limit the
  9. Correct that is what I have argued. I have previously suggested that a multi variable hypothesis for house prices is an alternative to the standard credit bubble hypothesis. It's not my idea - I've read this idea elsewhere. I think part of the confusion has come from me refusing to fully back the theory. This is deliberate because I am trying to view the world through alternative hypothesis (and assigning probability) rather than absolute truths. That said, I am strongly leaning to the view that house prices (outside of London) are not in a bubble. I'm not arguing the above because it is no
  10. Thanks for taking the time to respond. I don't think I really have much to add to the above. I don't think I disagree with anything you've written in particular although this isn't my area of expertise. The next 18 months are quite likely to be very interesting from a macro economics perspective. Perhaps we will have some more insight on the above. I agree with your sentiments earlier in the thread about morality - why let it cloud your judgement? - let us try to understand the world as best as we can. Ultimately things are as they are *And I write this as a 33 year old long term London rent
  11. Your posts from last year made me consider the limitations of the 'credit bubble hypothesis' for current house prices. That said, I struggle to understand whether the relationship between long-term interest rates and central bank behaviour is causational (i.e. CBs set them) or correlated (i.e. CBs respond to markets and the economy but cannot / do not influence them materially). From memory, you've previously argued that the current interest rate configuration (NIRP / ZIRP) is not a result of central bank action and that these banks would be unable to maintain rates above these levels even if
  12. Thanks. Bracket malfunction accepted. I'd had a few post holiday beers. Thinking about it further - I think my definition of jobs created by tech (CT) is wrong / incomplete also. It's not just the jobs created by the new technology (which may be limited) but also the jobs created through new tastes, desires and values (potentially [or not] eminating from the new tech).. Many of these may come about through temporary labour surplus. Would it really require herculean effort? We have the productivity data a meare google search away, across many countries. I've not looked into it but AIUI it i
  13. Give the guy a break. He's one of the few media types that actually seems to care about the housing crises.
  14. I was thinking about this thread on a long (4 hr) drive home today. One of the core hypothesis of this thread (not the only) seems to me to be that - technological adancement will lead to material *TBC quantificaiton* job losses and that this will be signfiicant because it will lead to a higher unemployment rate. Large numbers of people will be made technological obsolencent and unable to contribute econonically (from a supply side perspective) to the modern economy. Perhaps drawing up a strawman but I wanted to simplify. I assume the employment rate is defined something like (I'm not an ec
  15. You've obviously got good judgement for picking up on trends. Back in 2004/05, as a younger man, I didn't have a fully formed view of the world and couldn't put my finger on what *exactly* was wrong . I wish I'd found the forum back then (I think I'd found the website). Something was obviously wrong, I was sure, but I couldn't work out what. My reading at the time led me to the conclusion that resource scarcity and environmental degradation / global warming were going to be the key challenges the world faced. There were allot of wacky ideas out there at the time as I recall. I couldn't have be
  • 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.