Nationwide +1.3 (-6.2 YoY)

Graham_Devon

Really2 wrote: »

Well it as stopped those I have saved £XXXX this month posts.

I always classed saving as money put in to an account

What if it's put into a jar? Or a tin.

Cripes. Just to cover myself "into an object".

julieq

Graham, are you pathologically incapable of admitting you had something wrong?

Booms move the line hardly at all, neither do busts - that is the maths (it's O level, not genius level). You were asking whether the current boom had moved the line up significantly from its natural position with (it is assumed) the intention of arguing that the HPC graph might well fit after all.

And it doesn't. It'd be a pointless line if it did.

So please, move on, or you'll be arguing a point you can't possibly win.

Really2

Graham_Devon wrote: »

What if it's put into a jar? Or a tin.

Cripes. Just to cover myself "into an object".

Err, well yes money saved would be from cash you have not never had.


EG I saved £XXXX this month (because house prices fell)

I never saw that as saving neither do I see them losing money now because average prices have gone up.

Conrad

The MET office told us a balmy summer was on the cards. Academics nearly always get forecasts wrong - use your own eyes instead of muppet graphs.

I sometimes take part in surveys and for sure many questions do not allow a sufficient breadth of answers, so the end result of such stats = sh1te. Tis no different with graphs like this. Leave them to the academics.

IveSeenTheLight

julieq wrote: »

Look at it this way, if you have a set of 40 numbers all 3, how much does the 41st number need to change by to get the average to 3.5?

:wave:
Ooh Ooh Ooh I know, I know
i love maths questions

It's 23.5

<edit> awe you already answered

Graham_Devon

julieq wrote: »

So please, move on, or you'll be arguing a point you can't possibly win.

I'm not even arguing! (sorry, is that the wrong type of annoyance?) Keep yanking it though, at some point, you may get a bite.

I used "boom bust" isntead of "rise fall".

I am eternally sorry and apologise profusly for my misuse of wording.

julieq

Graham, for the avoidance of all doubt, why not restate the assertions you were making on the exponential trend position and what conclusions you want us to draw from them?

Graham_Devon

julieq wrote: »

Graham, for the avoidance of all doubt, why not restate the assertions you were making on the exponential trend position and what conclusions you want us to draw from them?

Julie, for the avoidance of completely pointless, unecessary, petty and ongoing arguments, I shall just leave you to your an*l holier than you stance.

Jeez, it was a simple analogy with a simple miss use of words which you have made a complete needless and pointless mountain out of, so do me a favour and stop humping my leg, cus I aint interested.

Have fun.

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'm not even arguing! (sorry, is that the wrong type of annoyance?) Keep yanking it though, at some point, you may get a bite.

I used "boom bust" isntead of "rise fall".

I am eternally sorry and apologise profusly for my misuse of wording.

As long as you understand that the long term trend is fact of where the average house price has trended over a long period and understand that this is what on average house prices should have been at that time.

To re-ask the question then.

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

As we are at the long term trend line, would people accept if there was stabalisation following that trend going forward? <edit> instead of booms and busts above and below the line</edit>

andyroberts1967

You lot scare me to death, and it's got nothing to do with house prices!!