Bank may pump more cash into UK

lemonjelly

Well, based on the breaking news, it appears that most doom-mongering was not accurate.

Shamelessly cut & pasted from Inspector Monkfish's postings:

It said it would review the programme in August.

Markets had widely expected the BoE to increase its asset purchase target by 25 billion pounds, allowing it to continue to pump money into the economy until August when it publishes new quarterly economic forecasts.

Britain's economy is no longer in freefall, as it was at the turn of the year, but bank lending remains weak and a sustained recovery is far from assured.

Unemployment is still rising, manufacturing is still contracting and the recent pick-up in services activity may be little more firms re-stocking after running down inventory.

From a macroeconomic point of view, leaving a gap in asset purchases between late July and early August, when the Bank of England will have more data, will do little harm. But it is likely to fuel the suspicion that the central bank has concluded its quantitative easing policy.

So it appears the end of QE may be nigh?

Graham_Devon

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

There was no lies and spin to make a poster look like he was telling lies.

There was prrof that the poster said one thing and then something different in another.

You yourself even agreed there was 3 houses initially, when the person then further inferred there was 4

No no no and no. I said 2 rentals and a home. I left the inherited place completely out as I didn't think it made much different to the stuff you were saying as you were specifically implying the poster was lying about rentals.

But here we go again with your "you yourself said" when I never said anything of the sort. Again, spinning out of context which is exactly what caused the other guff you insisted on crying over funnily enough, and here you are doing it right after to explain yourself and show yourself as not guilty.

The poster claimed to have been a BTL LL for 22 year and sold at the peak of 2007, yet didn't understand taxes that were applicable.

the poster also inferred he heard from aquantences and friends about the issues being a LL, but then refers he still is and has been a LL of 22 years. Why did he not know personally?

Consistency in posts is the key and it wasn't there by that poster.

But lets not go back there, this is a different topic

Well why did you go back then!?

chucky

lemonjelly wrote: »

Well, based on the breaking news, it appears that most doom-mongering was not accurate.

that is always the case on this forum and not a surprise

purch

So it appears the end of QE may be nigh?

No....the queue at the Cashpoint was too long, and Merv was late for the MPC meeting. Next time he's promised to leave a little earlier.

Radiantsoul

HousingBear wrote: »

This QE program has stabilised the economy in the same way that an intravenous drip, blood transfusions and massive doses of antibiotics might stabilise a patient at death's door. The fact is that this life support cannot be delivered for ever and at some point we are going to have to be weaned off this supply of new money. And what if all the pump-priming fails and the patient is still effectively flat-lining?

Ooooh, I'm feeling jolly today.

There would seem to be enough technological innovation out there to supply at least another 20 years of growth. I think you could single out;
wireless internet
green energy
stem cell/genetic medicines
large markets in china and india
lifetime education
as potential growth areas. Of course it is hard to predict winners(no-one in the 1960s would have picked cheap food retailers).

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

No no no and no.

:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:

cogito

mbga9pgf wrote: »

If the IMF dont make the decisioin for us, then the global bond market will. You CANNOT have a free lunch on behalf of your central bank forever; it comes sour in the end. If bond investors think their investments are being devalued, they will dump stirling and it will tank. Hard.

So, either government has to face its demons and cut public sector spending across the board, including benefits as well as departments and non-jobs, or we go bankrupt as a nation.

Simples.

And if the USA and ECB are also following the same policies, their currencies will presumably tank too. Result - no significant difference in exchange rates.