Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Venger said:

At least Hammond didn't touch S24.  I like to imagine HMRC/Banks won't allow him to, and convinced him of the need for S24.  Although I also like to imagine it was a planned strategy to get the BTLers to dance in hard into BTL double-down last few years.

Osborne; all those posts that were claiming he was positioning to become Prime Minister.  Referendum and sudden change for him.

He played it as you say... but I can't imagine he would have done anything too different from Hammond in this Budget.  S24 still in play.

The budget could have been MUCH worse, though it does sound to me like they are trying to prop up the pyramid from the bottom again, like HTB2.

The free market tories have given some people a better deal in a market, that should ring alarm bells for many.

Their efforts this time around was pretty feeble.  They know whats coming and nothing will stop it, just make a bit less painful for some.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 325
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 hours ago, zugzwang said:

They have no intention of building on green belt land, correct. The target of 300,000 will be met by re-defining what is meant by a home

http://www.rics.org/uk/news/news-insight/press-releases/rics-autumn-budget-response/

Even the RICS suggest the 300,000 target is nonsense and won't become reality and everyone other than the comfortably housed wealthy will continue to suffer...extracts from their press release below...

"In the run-up to the budget Phillip Hammond suggested he would be leading a concerted Government effort to deliver 300,000 homes a year. While some industry concerns have been taken into account, overall today’s announcements don’t match up to that ambition."

"Whilst the Chancellor is right to say there is ‘no single magic bullet’ to increase housing supply, it requires a lot more than the proposals he has put forward, which amount to a series of marginal and delayed ‘nudges’ at a time when housing supply needs an almighty immediate shove."

"Last but not least, we have had 14 Housing Ministers in the last 19 years but in future the UK’s housing must have a representative at Secretary of State level in the Cabinet to tackle what has become the country’s No 1 problem."

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

The budget could have been MUCH worse, though it does sound to me like they are trying to prop up the pyramid from the bottom again, like HTB2.

The free market tories have given some people a better deal in a market, that should ring alarm bells for many.

Their efforts this time around was pretty feeble.  They know whats coming and nothing will stop it, just make a bit less painful for some.

How much worse could the budget have been?

Another £25bn of helicopter money for the banks via the TFS. £44bn of direct and indirect subsidies for the house builders. Household debt forecast to rise to rise from £1.9tn today to 2.3tn in 2021. A balanced budget pushed back to 2030-31 (at the earliest), and an end to stamp duty.

If that's a govt making preparations for a house price crash then I'm a banana.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

How much worse could the budget have been?

Another £25bn of helicopter money for the banks via the TFS. £44bn of direct and indirect subsidies for the house builders. Household debt forecast to rise to rise from £1.9tn today to 2.3tn in 2021. A balanced budget pushed back to 2030-31 (at the earliest), and an end to stamp duty.

If that's a govt making preparations for a house price crash then I'm a banana.

The government are not making provision for a HPC,. their policies will cause it !!!!

The bankers/builders will make off with their loot.

Since when did the politicians know what was coming ?

 

How much worse....could have been another £500Bn for the bankers to lend. Could have been forced savings schemes to pay for housing, could have confiscated savers money, things could have been much worse.


WHat they have done is highlight how they are robbing people and giving their money to builders and trying to trick young people into buying a house, this will back fire on them soon enough.

As soon as the US p0ush rates up ano5ther 0.5% it's game over IMHO

Edited by TheCountOfNowhere
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

The government are not making provision for a HPC,. their policies will cause it !!!!

The bankers/builders will make off with their loot.

Since when did the politicians know what was coming ?

 

How much worse....could have been another £500Bn for the bankers to lend. Could have been forced savings schemes to pay for housing, could have confiscated savers money, things could have been much worse.


WHat they have done is highlight how they are robbing people and giving their money to builders and trying to trick young people into buying a house, this will back fire on them soon enough.

As soon as the US p0ush rates up ano5ther 0.5% it's game over IMHO

Why do US Fed rates affect ours? (Genuine question)

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tapori said:

Why do US Fed rates affect ours? (Genuine question)

I've just started reading up on economic policy so may be way off the mark, but here's my two pennies' worth.
Interest rates increase to reflect a growing economy meaning people are earning and spending money. In order to prevent the economy increasing to levels out of control, the increased rate makes people more reluctant to borrow and more likely to save. With reducing interest rates, the opposite is true- no one's spending so they encourage people to borrow with low rates.
If the Feds increase interest rates, investors get a better return on the dollar and hence there is more confidence in it- with time this could lead to more people shifting from pounds to dollars. Another thing could be that if the BOE doesn't follow suit, then it could show a lack of confidence in our economy. 

I'm trying to get my head around things so happy to hear other theories. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tapori said:

Why do US Fed rates affect ours? (Genuine question)

We're the 51st state of the US, that's why !!!!

Dollar is the reserve currency, everything is priced in dollars.

They increase their rates, the $ gets stronger, inflation rises.

Normally the UK IRs are slightly higher than the US, so when they get to 3% we need to be at 4.

Also, the effort to save the banks was global, the low IRs and QE was orchestrated.

The return to normal is also being orchestrated.

We are returning to normal, like it or not.  The US dont give two hoots about Northampton house prices :lol: 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tapori said:

Why do US Fed rates affect ours? (Genuine question)

Some would say.......

https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_international-economics-theory-and-policy/s19-05-exchange-rate-effects-of-chang.html

That is, the impact on exchange rates.

A falling pound causes an inflationary pressure (increased cost of imports, as we have seen) of which we can only take so much.

The key central bankers all work together to co-ordinate interest rate policies and maintain (or sometimes agree to alter) parity.

We tend to follow global interest rates, roughly, with a discreet lag.

 

Edited by Fence
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/11/2017 at 9:55 PM, macca13 said:

Don’t bet on it.,, will be help BTL next.. poor helpless soles.. 

oh no it already is.. build to let.. guess where all the new money will go.. 

the circle I can’t square is all the debt through term funding scheme this is creating to keep borrowing cheap they are making piles of debt.. 100’s of billions just to keep borrowing low..

maybe we are all barking up the wrong tree, maybe house price inflation is a side effect of other vested interests.. 

like companies buying back their own shares.. see on the Kieiser report companies disappearing off the stock market, buying back so many of their own shares with cheap printed money they return to being privatised. 

So who knows what our evil masters are doing..

although I’m not sure they are that smart.. greedy yes.. smart no..

 

 

Sorry to put a pin in that bubble. They are smart enough or at least can afford to pay for people who are and they are certainly greedy enough

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, TheCountOfNowhere said:

We're the 51st state of the US, that's why !!!!

Dollar is the reserve currency, everything is priced in dollars.

They increase their rates, the $ gets stronger, inflation rises.

Normally the UK IRs are slightly higher than the US, so when they get to 3% we need to be at 4.

Also, the effort to save the banks was global, the low IRs and QE was orchestrated.

The return to normal is also being orchestrated.

We are returning to normal, like it or not.  The US dont give two hoots about Northampton house prices :lol: 

I dont think anyone gives two hoots about Northampton house prices. Its a shit hole !

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Fence said:

Some would say.......

https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_international-economics-theory-and-policy/s19-05-exchange-rate-effects-of-chang.html

That is, the impact on exchange rates.

A falling pound causes an inflationary pressure (increased cost of imports, as we have seen) of which we can only take so much.

The key central bankers all work together to co-ordinate interest rate policies and maintain (or sometimes agree to alter) parity.

We tend to follow global interest rates, roughly, with a discreet lag.

 

A superb link btw, any biases in that text/who wrote that document?

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Tapori said:

A superb link btw, any biases in that text/who wrote that document?

Nah, standard economic theoretical stuff.  Rates are probably based more on a natter amongst a few central bankers.  Things are too interlinked to do your own thing these days and these guys and their teams believe they know best.  

Edited by Fence
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Evidence given by Rt Hon. Philip Hammond MP, Chancellor of the Exchequer, Clare Lombardelli, Director, Strategy, Planning and Budget, HM Treasury to the House of Commons Treasury Select Committee Budget Autumn 2017 inquiry:

Quote

Mr Hammond:  Let me just take you through my logic around the way we deal with the housing market.  We can only address affordability by improving supply of housing.  That is the route we have committed to.  Equally, the housing market plays a very important role in our overall financial economy.  Housing is the most important financial asset of most people in this country.  Therefore, the challenge here is to improve the affordability of housing as quickly as possible without damaging the housing market in a way that challenges financial stability.  That is quite a precise path.

I am clear that the trajectory to improved affordability will necessarily be quite a slow path.  In the meantime, it will be necessary for us to continue to provide demand‑side support to allow people who would otherwise be excluded from the market to get into the market.  The measures we took at the Budget to support first‑time buyers were a part of that.  The continuation of help to buy equity loan until 2021 was another important part of that process.

It is about aspiring to reach a point where housing becomes more affordable and genuinely available to people who would expect to be able to access the housing market while, in the short term, in the interim period, providing some continued support on the demand side.

The exchange begins at 36:43 on https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09lc05m/select-committees-budget-2017-committee

Link to post
Share on other sites

Philip Hammond talks Tax Credits and the 'Productivity Puzzle' at 01:52:30.

Quote

Mr Hammond:  Can I just make one further point, which I know the Committee is well aware of?  The UK’s approach, since the beginning of the recovery post the financial crisis and the recession that followed it, has been to support and encourage employment growth.  Other economies have chosen different routes, where high levels of unemployment have been tolerated.  The consequences of high levels of unemployment, particularly high levels of youth unemployment, will be felt for many, many years to come.  They will be generational impacts.  I think we have made the right decision, but it is almost certainly the case that, by increasing participation in the workforce, including far higher levels of participation by marginal groups and very high levels of engagement in the workforce, for example, by disabled people, which is something we should be extremely proud of, we may have had an impact on the overall productivity measurement.  That tells us that perhaps productivity measurement, in itself, is not the only thing we should be looking at.  Having high levels of workforce participation, allowing maximum access to the workforce by all groups in society, brings a benefit in itself and produces a larger GDP.  It may have collateral impacts on measured productivity performance.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, frederico said:

Thanks for posting, interesting.

Helps to keep hopes in check.

The bloke doesn't give a .....,,

There was never any doubt in my mind. HPI mad gainz to be protected at all costs. Affordability to be obtained over many years via the continuous subdivision and HMO-isation of the housing stock. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, zugzwang said:

There was never any doubt in my mind. HPI mad gainz to be protected at all costs. Affordability to be obtained over many years via the continuous subdivision and HMO-isation of the housing stock. 

 

Surely at some point everyone will say screw it and bugger off to a country which doesn't offer policies to benefit a few at the expense of young people. If there's anyone just finishing uni now and looking at older siblings living in HMOs,  surely they are thinking they should take their chance with moving abroad? Irish style emigration could well happen. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, UnconventionalWisdom said:

Surely at some point everyone will say screw it and bugger off to a country which doesn't offer policies to benefit a few at the expense of young people. If there's anyone just finishing uni now and looking at older siblings living in HMOs,  surely they are thinking they should take their chance with moving abroad? Irish style emigration could well happen. 

Too effing right. Unfortunately it's a global problem and I'm waiting for the first domino to fall (Oz?). The fact that it is global shows that it's a contrived bankster issue. Agenda 21??? Who knows?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Will! said:

Thanks for posting. Hopefully (for the Conservatives) those voters who are unable or unwilling to buy a house at current prices will be happy to wait for a couple more decades before buying so that house prices can follow Hammond's "slow path" to protect the banks. Keep calm and carry on renting, do it for the banks. Truly an inspiring message for young and increasingly middle aged workers and surely one that will help the Tories romp to a 100 seat majority at the next general election.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Dorkins said:

Thanks for posting. Hopefully (for the Conservatives) those voters who are unable or unwilling to buy a house at current prices will be happy to wait for a couple more decades before buying so that house prices can follow Hammond's "slow path" to protect the banks. Keep calm and carry on renting, do it for the banks. Truly an inspiring message for young and increasingly middle aged workers and surely one that will help the Tories romp to a 100 seat majority at the next general election.

Hammond strikes me as from another world to the rest of us...

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, UnconventionalWisdom said:

Surely at some point everyone will say screw it and bugger off to a country which doesn't offer policies to benefit a few at the expense of young people. If there's anyone just finishing uni now and looking at older siblings living in HMOs,  surely they are thinking they should take their chance with moving abroad? Irish style emigration could well happen. 

Best then to start at an overseas uni.  Cheaper too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • 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.