August Mortgage Lending drops 13%

Really2

Demanufacture wrote: »

Check out K. Denninger's new video (youtube it), I'm genuinely interested in a counter to his argument. You seem to disagree with my (his) theory, so what's the counter ?

Somebody thanked you, they obviously see a solution as well, what is it ?

See I will, A video done on you tube does not make it a factual future happening.

Things predicted, they are usually wrong.
How low did you think house prices would be at the end of this year?? I think that gives you the answer to the problem of predicting the future.

And sorry I did not watch the video I respect your views but I do not buy in to Mad Max events they have been predicted the whole of my life.

My counter argument would be why are we not like that now? we have had similar recessions and political termoil in the past but we are still a civilized race.

Do you think a larger more intelligent population are even more likely to be less civilized?

My final Counter Argument is........................... David Ike.:)

Really2

Demanufacture wrote: »

Mmm, bit hostile in here hey. I'm surprised, I was waiting for a good counter argument, there was none only head in the sand, fair enough, I guess if that's how folk here deal with opposing views can't do much about it.

TBF I was not hostile.
I gave a counter argument, and to say not believing you is having out heads in the sand proves that their is nothing to debate in you mind anyway.

It's like ghosts, if some one believes they do not exist they have not got their head in the sand as they have never been proven too exist (using past experience to rationalise how to react to future events is normal human behaviour and part of our evolution to deal with change, or lack of it;))

As your guy been proven to be right? If not i can still think a Mad Max event wont happen because so many have been predicted in the past and they have not happened.

If he is right my not believing him would not of changed anything anyway.

See, its' al'right. Crack a tin of beans and a spam open to celebrate
(Sorry this is a joke mate and not meant to antagonise you:))

StevieJ

Demanufacture wrote: »

Mmm, bit hostile in here hey. I'm surprised, I was waiting for a good counter argument, there was none only head in the sand, fair enough, I guess if that's how folk here deal with opposing views can't do much about it.

If you had to respond rationally to every septic on the internet who spouts society and financial breakdown theories we would be here untill doomsday (oooops) :eek:

IveSeenTheLight

Is people's intelligence in here really going downhill into trying to turn everything into a side of the fence argument?

I don't understand how facts showing less re-mortgaging thus less new borrowing cannot be attributed to people (for the time being) taking advantage of SVR's being lower than new mortgage products.

I personally don't recall a time when the SVR was lower than going for a new mortgage deal.

For re-mortgaging, this is why people are not taking out new loans.

When the SVR's are higher than new mortgage products, we'll see an increase in the request for re-mortgaging

Really2

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Is people's intelligence in here really going downhill into trying to turn everything into a side of the fence argument?

I don't understand how facts showing less re-mortgaging thus less new borrowing cannot be attributed to people (for the time being) taking advantage of SVR's being lower than new mortgage products.

I personally don't recall a time when the SVR was lower than going for a new mortgage deal.

For re-mortgaging, this is why people are not taking out new loans.

When the SVR's are higher than new mortgage products, we'll see an increase in the request for re-mortgaging

Wait for my new thread

IveSeenTheLight

StevieJ wrote: »

Oh no, not one of them :eek:

Maybe he's an aspiring actor and wants to be in Mad Max 4: Fury Road

zappahey

Really2 wrote: »

So it was down 36% on last year last month 37% on last year this month.

Looks like the 13% is a seasonal drop on the above facts.

Based on that very short-term view you could be right but, looking back for as far as I can find CML figures, the seasonality is rather less clear cut.


Year | --July- | --Aug- | % Change
2002 | 12400 | 12200 | -1.61%
2003 | 11900 | 11900 | 0.00%
2004 | 14600 | 12800 | -12.33%
2005 | 11800 | 12300 | 4.24%
2006 | 30589 | 32790 | 7.20%
2007 | 34313 | 32216 | -6.11%
2008 | 24945 | 19868 | -20.35%
2009 | 14493 | 12600 | -13.06%

purch

I can 'borrow' at .5%. Strictly speaking, not borrowing of course, but using cash to purchase stuff. It only 'costs' .5%.

Cash is so ancient

mewbie_2

purch wrote: »

Cash is so ancient

Some of us still like to have a bit hanging around. You never know what's around the corner.

Really2

mewbie wrote: »

Some of us still like to have a bit hanging around. You never know what's around the corner.

mewbie wrote: »

Oh Really - do you believe what you read on here?

mmmm what to believe.