Newsnight: Quantitative Easing

SGE1

Really2 wrote: »

Well you are the one who moans about peoples spelling then when you get pulled up on it you had a moan.:D

"mine was a key stroke error his was a spelling mistake.":rotfl:
Get over yourself, you will be right at home here.:rotfl:

If you think that was a moan, you ain't seen nothing yet.

And sorry, but accidentally writing US instead of UK (which I assume is what you're talking about) isn't the same as writing undecipherable words. At least I'm trying to work out what you're talking about, and you're not really helping me out, are you!

dopester

!!!!!!? wrote: »

And only six months ago it was being tipped for up to $200 a barrel by Goldman Sachs, that other shining Wall Street success story.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&sid=ayxRKcAZi630

So I'd take anything coming out of Wall Street with a pinch of salt, frankly.

Thankfully I'm capable of independent thought. That is my argument to you for following newspaper columns in your near absolute faith for inflation and the printing press.

Your $200 oil story was from May..whilst experts were bigging up commodities as the place to be, and few were ready to point to the dangers of oncoming deflation.

Yet what was my position in April...?

dopester wrote: »

In my view we are only at the very start of a deflationary process the where house prices will give up all of the inflationary gains during the past 8 to 10 years of credit boom - perhaps the greatest collapse in history.

or June, as you still were going on about inflation as the main threat..

dopester wrote: »

I'm another believing after the intial inflationary period we'll be in for deflation for many years to come.

Not good for people with their wealth in property and a lot of debt to go with it. Deflation is coming and they will have to full-on snog it.

It's the credit contraction worsening that is the key to deflation - and it's unavoidable it will get worse.

dopester

StevieJ wrote: »

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]My comment - [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Thank you for this interesting article. I agree that we need to be cautious of extreme forecasts following what has already been, by any standard, a spectacular decline. When we see forecasts for something to halve in three-months, this tells us more about the open positions a pundit has rather than where the price is going. [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]This section continues in the Subscriber's Area. [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

Yes; quite spectacular.

However I doubt your claim that it is simply a story trying to move the price of oil to $20 by speculators. Maybe that was more a case of when the frenzy was on for $200 a barrel oil... when others were warning of imminent deflation taking hold.

What did it reach... around $160 a barrel...? Now trading at around $42 a barrel?

Interesting times for our HPI Aberdeenies who seem unable to process any prospect of job losses and pay cuts. Welcome to deflationary depression.

dopester

!!!!!!? wrote: »

Luckily, the only thing I really want to buy at the moment is a house (ok, maybe a decent car too) and house prices are still very much headed in the right direction. They will only reverse once the banks begin loony lending again - and that won't happen until the government print up a load of bonds to wipe out their bad debt.

However, once the money starts being printed it won't make a lot of sense to hold any savings beyond what you might need as 'emergency ready cash'.

I think if you have savings not earmarked for a house, now might be a good time to start following energy, mining, agriculture, food retail stocks with a view to buying in should they show signs of a rise. Any hard asset that will generate ongoing income, basically. They will be jumped on once the printing begins.

Deflation may have the upper hand at the moment but print enough money and price inflation is guaranteed ... and they will print enough money however much that is.

Ok I'm not going to try and counter this any more. We'll review what the position is in 6 months.

You may be right, but now is not a time to believe all the experts you read in the newspapers, and your path is going to be wholly more damaging to the majority than accepting deflation. Something I trust the markets will educate Governments about.

shaven-monkey

perhaps printing more money is just a reaction to people having no trust in banks anymore or when you say "printing more money" what is meant is that the bank of england will lend larger sums of money secured against government bonds to the banks who then lend out 8 to 60 times that quantity of money to each other and the marks. So in essence it's a reversed debt consolidation : The marks pay a percentage of their assets to pay for the screwups of some fraudulent traders in big invesment banks.

It would be inflationary but in comparison with the credit "boom" before the credit "crunch" it's a gnats fart in a hurricaine.
how great does a collapse have to be to qualify as the greatest?

Are we talking about Mad Max, leather trousers with the !!!! cut out or are you just saying lots of people will have shelter and a basic standard of living but be unable to buy chinese made plastic toys when the old toys lose their shine?

4 pages, 3 of which seem to be personal sniping about ideological points only vaguely related to the OP. I love you all, you hairy monkeys.

Really2

SGE1 wrote: »

If you think that was a moan, you ain't seen nothing yet.

And sorry, but accidentally writing US instead of UK (which I assume is what you're talking about) isn't the same as writing undecipherable words. At least I'm trying to work out what you're talking about, and you're not really helping me out, are you!

What you accidentally wrote in american not in UK english.
Are M and N different places errrrr. no.:rolleyes:
As for the bold bit are you having a laugh you are trying to understand but just pointing out I spelt words wrong (does that not mean it is not undecipherable?)
I don't belive in different log ons usually, but with such a stickler for written english I do have to think you may be someone who has had a previous problem with me.(damn thats a lot of people)

I have tryed to help you out but you dont understand. You said taxes were average compared to the rest of the world.
I pointed out with stealth taxes and indirect taxes that was not true.
You then started on my spelling.:rolleyes:

purch

This section continues in the Subscriber's Area

............and very interesting it is too !!!!!!!!

StevieJ

dopester wrote: »

Yes; quite spectacular.

However I doubt your claim that it is simply a story trying to move the price of oil to $20 by speculators. Maybe that was more a case of when the frenzy was on for $200 a barrel oil... when others were warning of imminent deflation taking hold.

What did it reach... around $160 a barrel...? Now trading at around $42 a barrel?

Interesting times for our HPI Aberdeenies who seem unable to process any prospect of job losses and pay cuts. Welcome to deflationary depression.

Just to correct that, it was not my comment is was Fullermoney comment.
My comment is: Oil reserves shrinking - Long term oil demand increasing (China growth still expected at 8% next year) - Doesn't take a genius to see where that is going.

StevieJ

purch wrote: »

............and very interesting it is too !!!!!!!!

I know I should join

SGE1

Really2 wrote: »

As for the bold bit are you having a laugh you are trying to understand but just pointing out I spelt words wrong

Actually, I asked you what WUN meant, it's not my fault you have some kind of persecution complex and assumed I was taking the mick.