Inflation Hits 2.3% !

[Guest Charlie The Tramp]

Well it looks like the government are even more desperate to borrow your money.

Now TWO One million pound prizes every month on the Premium Bonds and not the extra sales to warrant it.

[Dicky]

Well it looks like the government are even more desperate to borrow your money.

Now TWO One million pound prizes every month on the Premium Bonds and not the extra sales to warrant it. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Even Alan Sugar has been wheeled out to advertise it, such a nice man, you're fired ernie.

[Guest muttley]

Well it looks like the government are even more desperate to borrow your money.

Now TWO One million pound prizes every month on the Premium Bonds and not the extra sales to warrant it. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fewer fifty pound prizes though,Charlie.

Also,doesn't August fall in IRs mean fewer prizes?

[Losing Faith]

I don't get why we would use government bonds.

The rates seem better (very, very fractionally) from the banks.

From the government's point of view, is it better to sell bonds than borrow from banks?

Edited August 16, 2005 by Losing Faith

[OnlyMe]

Even Alan Sugar has been wheeled out to advertise it, such a nice man, you're fired ernie.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My wife asked me about premium bonds yesterday, did the sums and worked out an approx achievable interest rate, still didn't stack up really but maybe do it for the fun, then thought of Sweet Sugar and thought no chance.

[Guest Charlie The Tramp]

Fewer fifty pound prizes though,Charlie.

Also,doesn't August fall in IRs mean fewer prizes?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not if millions of savers increase the sales.

I think a few years back after massive spending spree one Christmas there were large withdrawals of ISAs and cashing in of bonds, probably to pay off their spending spree. ( They did pay their debts then )

The prizes dropped from 25 pages to 13 pages on teletext and have slowly returned to past levels. More bonds equals more interest in the pot and more prizes.

My wife asked me about premium bonds yesterday, did the sums and worked out an approx achievable interest rate, still didn't stack up really but maybe do it for the fun, then thought of Sweet Sugar and thought no chance.

The return from my and Mrs C`s bonds have returned an average 9% the past five years. In line now for one of the larger prizes.

Edited August 16, 2005 by Charlie The Tramp

[Dames]

Not if millions of savers increase the sales.

I think a few years back after massive spending spree one Christmas there were large withdrawals of ISAs and cashing in of bonds, probably to pay off their spending spree. ( They did pay their debts then  )

The prizes dropped from 25 pages to 13 pages on teletext and have slowly returned to past levels. More bonds equals more interest in the pot and more prizes. 

The return from my and Mrs C`s bonds have returned an average 9% the past five years. In line now for one of the larger prizes. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well hopefully we'll have a bit of luck ourselves , just done the full monty in Mrs Dames name.

Here's hoping.

Dames :0)

[Losing Faith]

"Yes, Brown, B...R...O..W...N.  'N' yes 'N' for Nanny.  How much can I borrow?  Yes, 5 years, I suppose.  No Just 1 credit card.  It's a Hibernian supporter's card  ... not certain if its visa or mastercard ... oh, yes visa.  My job?  Well I'm not certain how you'd describe it..."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What????

[Starcrossed]

Why has there been so little serious discussion in the mainstream media over the past few months along the lines of this thread?

I know that this is a question that has been asked on this board many times but I am reminded of it once again today.

Is it:

i) the 'dumbing-down' of media outlets to sell product?

ii) vested interests protecting truly important information and analysis for their own reasons?

iii) the media uncritically buying GB's 'economic miracle' thus inadvertantly proving the existence of a bubble economy?

iv) the trend for media outlets to parrot each other?

v) the desperate need to simply believe everything is OK?

vi) laziness?

vii) incomptence?

When the whole shaky edifice falls down I hope it will take some of the above with it.

Edited August 16, 2005 by Starcrossed

[Guest Charlie The Tramp]

Well hopefully we'll have a bit of luck ourselves , just done the full monty in Mrs Dames name.

Here's hoping.

Dames :0)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

None for you then? Better chance the full monty by two.

[Mushroom]

Higher inflation will probably be used to justify a salary and expenses increase for our illustrious MPs.

Because they are worth it.

Afterall, if you want the best, you have to pay for it.

[Dicky]

Higher inflation will probably be used to justify a salary and expenses increase for our illustrious MPs.

Because they are worth it.

Afterall, if you want the best, you have to pay for it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good point, when are MP salaries reviewed, quick quick send the inflation basket of goods bloke to M&S, get rid of that sh1tty cheap Co-op bread thats been keeping the figure down for the last year.

Edited August 16, 2005 by Dicky

[Guest muttley]

Higher inflation will probably be used to justify a salary and expenses increase for our illustrious MPs.

Because they are worth it.

Afterall, if you want the best, you have to pay for it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Unions will have noticed the rise too.

[AgeingBabyBoomer]

Odd though, back in the 70's and 80's, inflation of only 2.3% would have been conidered an economic miracle

ABB

[mbga9pgf]

Odd though, back in the 70's and 80's, inflation of only 2.3% would have been conidered an economic miracle

ABB

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thats because its not actually 2.3%.... Its MUCH MUCH WORSE!!!

[Starcrossed]

Odd though, back in the 70's and 80's, inflation of only 2.3% would have been conidered an economic miracle

ABB

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Very true - but interest rates would have been much higher as well.

Just goes to show how presumptuous the expectation of low rates forever is.

[Guest Charlie The Tramp]

Odd though, back in the 70's and 80's, inflation of only 2.3% would have been conidered an economic miracle

ABB

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The difference was that the inflation figures then were accurate.

In comparison with today the true inflation figure IMHO is around 5%.

[WBFTB]

The difference was that the inflation figures then were accurate. 

In comparison with today the true inflation figure IMHO is around 5%. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why is this?

I'm not challenging your opinion...Just don't understand why and would like to.

[Guest muttley]

Odd though, back in the 70's and 80's, inflation of only 2.3% would have been conidered an economic miracle

ABB

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Inflation was high during the 70's and 80's because of the large number of Baby Boomers reaching the work force.As this declined so did inflation (despite what the politicians tell you).The current trend is for low inflation.

[Guest Charlie The Tramp]

Why is this?

I'm not challenging your opinion...Just don't understand why and would like to.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Everything then was thrown into the pot, the true cost of living, not the selective parts they now use.

[mbga9pgf]

Why is this?

I'm not challenging your opinion...Just don't understand why and would like to.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

ITs so the government could lower IRs, cause a huge spending spree, and create an atmosphere of everything is alright. Its achieved by them not accounting for the major cost increases (taxes, council tax etc) instead focusing on grapes. The weighting and importance of some products, such as petrol, are far below what they should be. overall, the level of inflation cant be hidden forever...

its going to bite them sooner or later, they just were not betting on getting in for a 3rd term is my theory, then they could have blamed the blues for whatever maelstrom followed the election.

[AgeingBabyBoomer]

abelard.org has awell reasoned and simple measure of inflation:

% change in GDP- %change in (M4?) money supply

works out to around 4.7% (sic).

I'm not so sure about the baby boomer theory, I thought the peak was in1964 for births

(when I was born - God I'm old), which would put the peak hit on the workforce at 1984 ish.

But I remember high inflation right from the early 70's....perhaps more

to do with oil prices and the cold war?

Anybody remember the sugar crisis?

ABB

Edited twice, once for typos, once after checking the maths

Edited August 16, 2005 by AgeingBabyBoomer

[Guest Charlie The Tramp]

Inflation was high during the 70's and 80's because of the large number of Baby Boomers reaching the work force.As this declined so did inflation (despite what the politicians tell you).The current trend is for low inflation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So it wasn`t the two Harold`s, Ted`s, and Jim`s fault after all, and they all left us not knowing it.

[Guest muttley]

I'm not so sure about the baby boomer theory, I thought the peak was in1964 for births

(when I was born - God I'm old), which would put the peak hit on the workforce at 1984 ish.

But I remember high inflation right from the early 70's....perhaps more

to do with oil prices and the cold war?

ABB

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wasn't unemployment around 3 million in 1984?

[Dicky]

Anybody remember the sugar crisis?

Edited twice, once for typos, once after checking the maths

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes I do, I was in my 1st year at school and we couldn't gob stoppers for love nor money, there was a real panic on, dealers were selling them on street corners for £10 a pack. I'm so glad those days are behind me now.