Don't Bank On More Interest Cuts

[pod]

Britain could now be close to an economic 'worst of all worlds'. It is one that combines slowing growth, subdued consumer spending, rising unemployment, a housing market dead in many areas, rising inflation, pending tax increases and interest rate setters deeply divided as to what the response should be: rate cuts, no cuts - or even an increase.

http://business.scotsman.com/economy.cfm?id=1817532005

[Once in a lifetime]

Mortgage deal interest rates may go up

http://www.abcmoney.co.uk/news/202005729.htm

LONDON: Home buyers in the U.K. have been advised not to postpone their decisions on mortgage deals in the hope of getting cheaper fixed rate deals. It is possible that the rates may in fact go up in view of a surprise disclosure by Bank of England that core inflation in the country was at its highest for a decade.

Some of the lenders have already raised rates on their best buys while some have withdrawn them in the light of the central bank's announcement, which almost made it clear there will not be any more rate cuts in the immediate future. The bank had brought the base rates by a quarter of a percentage point to 4.5 per cent.

[Guest Charlie The Tramp]

It is one that combines slowing growth, subdued consumer spending, rising unemployment, a housing market dead in many areas, rising inflation, pending tax increases and interest rate setters deeply divided as to what the response should be: rate cuts, no cuts - or even an increase.

Stagflation with massive debt, well that`s new uncharted territory.

Two features stand out. The first was the vote of the Bank governor Mervyn King against the cut - the first time a Bank governor has been in the minority in an MPC vote. As the governor always votes last at MPC rate meetings, his decision to vote against the majority could be seen as a deliberate decision not to be associated with the rate-cutters. Such a challenge to the majority view can only unsettle market confidence in the arguments for the MPC's decision.

I bet the magician choked on his morning coffee and biscuits, quick telephone call to his ego getter Mr Edward Balls MP waitng to be called to Court, or to his appointment as Governor of the BoE.

Second, King was backed in his opposition by his two deputies - Rachel Lomax and Sir Andrew Large - and by the Bank's markets director Paul Tucker. There is a clear suggestion here of reputations being put on the line. The vote to cut was driven through by the 'outsiders' on the committee: Kate Barker, Steve Nickell, David Walton and Richard Lambert. Quipped a rueful James Carrick, UK economist at ABN AMRO, who had predicted a 'no change' vote: "If only the committee wasn't handpicked by Chancellor Gordon Brown and packed with flimsy business lobbyists, academics, journalists and ex-civil servants, we'd have got the call right."

The reason the country is going to the dogs, it`s akin to a St Johns first aider being appointed to head the GMC.

Mortgage deal interest rates may go up

Believe me the lenders are not going to take the predicted 12 billion pounds in defaults lightly, someone has got to pay and it won`t be the shareholders.

Edited August 21, 2005 by Charlie The Tramp

[Guest Time 2 raise Interest Rates]

Financial Mail FIX WHILE YOU CAN SAY LOAN EXPERTS, By Helen Loveless.

Fixed-rate mortgages are ON THE RISE, dispite a cut in the Bank of England base

rate this month.

Experts are advising home owners to consider signing up for two year and three

year fixed deals while they are STILL AVAILABLE at very low rates.

At the beginning of August, the Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee voted

to cut rates by 0.25% to 4.5%. But subsequent figures suggesting that high oil

prices are stoking inflation have reduced the likelihood of further cuts.

LENDERS ARE RESPONDING BY WITHDRAWING SHORT-TERM FIXED DEALS, OR

PUTTING UP RATES ON DEALS FOR NEW CUSTOMERS.

[the end is a bit nigher]

http://business.scotsman.com/economy.cfm?id=1817532005

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Does anyone remember what it was like under the last Labour government? - a bit like this really. It took 18 years to sort out the last mess and within a few years NL have brought it back again. Under-productive country based on benefits, over-paid useless local and central government and a population who borrow to buy.

Down the pan again.

[Dames]

Does anyone remember what it was like under the last Labour government? - a bit like this really. It took 18 years to sort out the last mess and within a few years NL have brought it back again. Under-productive country based on benefits, over-paid useless local and central government and a population who borrow to buy.

Down the pan again.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Personally I dont , but I'm feelin' your pain man.

D

[Losing Faith]

I wonder if King was kite flying.

He is last to vote and so given that his vote would not make any difference to the outcome on rate setting he could use his vote to say, further cuts are not guaranteed. He may have been in favour of the cut, but did not want to create the debt-bonanza fuelling impression that a 6-3 vote might create.

[Bluelady]

Does anyone remember what it was like under the last Labour government? - a bit like this really. It took 18 years to sort out the last mess and within a few years NL have brought it back again. Under-productive country based on benefits, over-paid useless local and central government and a population who borrow to buy.

Down the pan again.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, I do remember. I also remember what it was like in the early 90s under a Tory government, which had been in power for over ten years. Runaway inflation, sky high interest rates, repossessions, rampant unemployment - it was an absolute nightmare. Which is why those of us who have clear memories of Thatcherism and its effects would never vote Tory and see our present economy as rather healthy by comparison.

[the don]

Yes, I do remember.  I also remember what it was like in the early 90s under a Tory government, which had been in power for over ten years.  Runaway inflation, sky high interest rates, repossessions, rampant unemployment - it was an absolute nightmare.  Which is why those of us who have clear memories of Thatcherism and its effects would never vote Tory and see our present economy as rather healthy by comparison.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

bluelady

thatcher had to deal with the devastation caused by 15 years or so of socialist lunacy years which included heaths brief spell in charge.

in 1979 the country was f******ED and it took huge upheavel to get us back on track.

i would agree that not all was perfrect and the late 80's saw them lose the plot for a while.

however, john major and ken clarke prepared the ground for todays better times.

i used to think that labour had learnt the lessons of the 60's and 70's .

in the last few years i have begun to doubt this. we will know for sure by the next election.

probably need another thatcher or even an enoch powell

[Bluelady]

Labour was not continuously in power for the 15 years preceding 1979 - the Tories had to take some of the blame for the position the country was in at that time. Equally, they had been in power for 10 years when recession hit us big time in 1989 - they have to take the blame for that, if it had happened immediately they came into power, they could blame Labour, given the timing, they couldn't and can't.

I'm old enough and cynical enough to think they're both as bad as each other.

[the end is a bit nigher]

Yes, I do remember.  I also remember what it was like in the early 90s under a Tory government, which had been in power for over ten years.  Runaway inflation, sky high interest rates, repossessions, rampant unemployment - it was an absolute nightmare.  Which is why those of us who have clear memories of Thatcherism and its effects would never vote Tory and see our present economy as rather healthy by comparison.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

if you think our current economy is an improvement then your grasp of fundamental economics is sadly lacking, but as someone who has previously defended the troughing exercises of local councillors on here, i'm not really surprised

Thatcher was responsible for removing many 'dead' jobs abd replacing them with real ones - on the other hand, the present government's job creation scheme is based upon one-off money raising exercises (3G windfall?) and creating hundreds of thousands of new civil service posts, doing what, no-one knows

Edited August 21, 2005 by the end is nigh

[the don]

whilst labour was not continuosly in power for 15 years before 1979, the environment was of industrial anarchy, facilitated by incompetent management.

this had taken root in the 60s wilson governments.

heaths government never really made any impact. the lone voice spekaing out was enoch powell who was poliitcally assassinated after the rivers of blood speech. this enabled his enemies to brand him a racist, which he definitely was not. the period at the end of the 1974-1979 wilson/ callaghan governments was one of serious decline

thatcher took away from the unions and the cr*p management the idea that they could behave as they wanted and that somehow the government would come to their rescue.

eventually the penny dropped that the world no more owes the british a liivng than anyone else on this planet.

the recession at the end of the 1980s was a combination of loose fiscal policy and another housing bubble. ( echoes of today?)

ther was also the misguided efforts to shadow the Deutsche mark based on euro enthsiam from some.

yes it was ugly and there were lots of casualties.

however., i have yet to find someone who even with hindsight could promote an alternative way to put UK back on an even keel.

i think thatcher was a person who tried to give all of us an equal shot at getting on.

this government is happy to enslave millions in debt misery whilst carving out more sleaze gotten riches for the cronies than the tories have ever done

Edited August 21, 2005 by the don

[Marina]

Yes, I do remember.  I also remember what it was like in the early 90s under a Tory government, which had been in power for over ten years.  Runaway inflation, sky high interest rates, repossessions, rampant unemployment - it was an absolute nightmare.  Which is why those of us who have clear memories of Thatcherism and its effects would never vote Tory and see our present economy as rather healthy by comparison.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with never voting Tory and your comments about Thatcherism (although something needed to be done about union power - lets not forget the late 70s and the unburied dead in the streets of Liverpool) - but 'our present economy as rather healthy by comparison'?

I fear we have had the good years (ironically because an incoming government inherited a healthy economy for the first time I can remember) but this Government have done what all Labour governments have done - increased public spending, raised taxes and employed lots more people (with their attendant pension costs) in the public sector. They have introduced more and more bureaucracy and made it much more costly to do business.

But we have yet to see the similarity between the early 90's and the years 2005 to 2010. We may not have the high inflation but we are definitely in for the high unemployment, recession etc.

The balls up of the early 90s was caused by a speculative bubble in the housing market. Anyone with a brain would have raised interest rates as soon as the papers were beginning to fill with all the property as an investment stories. But they didn't - they couldn't - because, like the Tories before them Labour needed consumers to spend us out of trouble.

I believe politicians are congenitally incapable of running an economy. Surely it should be left to businessmen with proven track records?

[Matt]

I think human beings with our herd mentality make any economy impossible to run. Politicians can't really do anything about it. Sad but true. All we can do is work the system for our individual gain, by buying and selling at the right time.

[the end is a bit nigher]

I agree with never voting Tory and your comments about Thatcherism (although something needed to be done about union power - lets not forget the late 70s and the unburied dead in the streets of Liverpool) - but 'our present economy as rather healthy by comparison'?

I fear we have had the good years (ironically because an incoming government inherited a healthy economy for the first time I can remember)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So you are saying that the present government inherited a healthy economy for the first time you can remember but you wouldn't vote for the party that produced that healthy economy?

Have I missed something?

[Leodhasach]

My family personally did quite well out of Mrs. T., through "right to buy" and the move of taxation from income to purchases (my parents not being smokers, drinkers nor drivers).

But the attitude of "who cares if it's wrong for them if right for me and my family" is exactly the attitude of the speculators and BTLers which have put most of the users of this forum in fear for their financial future, so I personally will be joining the queue to dance on Mrs T.'s grave when she shuffles off. Everyone from my part of the world knows someone whose life was destroyed when the "uneconomic" industries were privatised to fund pre-election tax bribes - the same "uneconomic industries" which made billions for people who'd never seen the inside of a pit, a shipyard or a steel mill in their lives when the rumps of these industries were sold off to further line the pockets of the already rich.

The mess we are in with NL's current day spivs does not overwrite the mess caused by the overpriviliged and underintelligent politicians of the 80's and 90's.

[Bluelady]

Thatcher was responsible for removing many 'dead' jobs abd replacing them with real ones - on the other hand, the present government's job creation scheme is based upon one-off money raising exercises (3G windfall?) and creating hundreds of thousands of new civil service posts, doing what, no-one knows

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thatcher destroyed the manufacturing base in this country, lots of real jobs disappeared. She also destroyed the coal industry, all those real jobs replaced by whole communities on the dole and completely destroyed. More than 20 years later those communities are still suffering the effects.

I was there, were you? I doubt it.

[the don]

thtacher did bnot destroy the manufacturing base.

the inefficient management and anarchic unions did that.

thatcher just let them get one with it without bailing them out.

the coal industry was doomed from the first day of nationalistion.

my father worked in steel from just afte the war. originally in private hands, the plant he worked on was effiicient and tightly managed.

post nationalisation- jobs for the boys every where and no semblance of accountability.

and for the record, nulabour has seen 1 milion manufacturing jobs go since 1997.

i think coal will re-emerge if oil prices stay this high.

for sure it will be a different animal than the one that existed under the national coal board

[E Powell]

Greed will bring this country down.

Death to new labour & the conservatives

Thatcherite greed = blairite greed

[Bluelady]

nulabour has seen 1 milion manufacturing jobs go since 1997.

i think coal will re-emerge if oil prices stay this high.

for sure it will be a different animal than the one that existed under the national coal board

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Really? Where have these 1 million jobs gone from?

How will coal re-emerge? Where's the money going to come from to re-open pits or sink new ones?

And you're wrong, it was Thatcher who destroyed the manufacturing base of this country, how about you check how many real jobs disappeared during her reign of terror?

[the don]

Really?  Where have these 1 million jobs gone from?

How will coal re-emerge?  Where's the money going to come from to re-open pits or sink new ones?

And you're wrong, it was Thatcher who destroyed the manufacturing base of this country, how about you check how many real jobs disappeared during her reign of terror?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

the million jobs is as per official government staitsics which show the number of people employed in the manufacturing sector today vs 1997.

if you doubt this i will go to the trouble of getting the exact data and posting it.

with regards to coal, it is self evident that if oil/ gas prices stay so high, coal demand will pick up.

there is a lot of cheap coal available from australia and south africa, but at current prices more coal from the UK is potentially viable.this will also be affected by any currency deprciation that may occur

Coal prices have risen from £1.00/GJ 3 years ago to about £1.50/GJ today.

There are plenty of possible opencast sites and eventually there will be government pressure to ease up on planning restrictions.

if labour dont do it the next tory government will

deep mining can be viable at these prices.

finally it is a matter of viewpoint whether you think that thatcher was a hero or a villain.

i respect your opinion but in my book she was the greatest PM we have ever had.

[OzzMosiz]

Really?  Where have these 1 million jobs gone from?

How will coal re-emerge?  Where's the money going to come from to re-open pits or sink new ones?

And you're wrong, it was Thatcher who destroyed the manufacturing base of this country, how about you check how many real jobs disappeared during her reign of terror?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I've seen loads of jobs disappearing. Rover, AA, BA, multiple telecoms companies - to name a few!

And yes Labour did inherit a healthy economy.